![]() | 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 50 | ← | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | Archive 56 | Archive 57 | Archive 58 | → | Archive 60 |
The article I am working on now shows all green and less than 25% confidence, though Earwig's tool still marks things like "People's Republic of China", "Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP)" or "Caragana gerardiana and Lonicera spinosa" in pink. How bad is that? Aditya( talk • contribs) 08:32, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
In the edit filter, there is this guy who keeps attempting to create apam usernames and is filling up the filter logs. Anything that you can do? 2602:306:3357:BA0:3476:9B74:A8E2:994E ( talk) 16:53, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello. I am working on getting permission for one the files you flagged, File:Cropped portrait of Zoe Strimpel.jpg. I asked Ms. Strimpel to send a clearance email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. The other file, File:Portrait of Zoe Strimpel.jpg can be deleted. Rgonsalv ( talk) 23:23, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
OK, Ms. Strimpel sent a clearance email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. I added the {{ OTRS pending}} tag to the file description page. Rgonsalv ( talk) 04:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
OK, thanks for tracking this down. Note that in her email, she released the photo under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License. Please update the Licensing on the file description page. Rgonsalv ( talk) 12:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
I saw that you looked at User:Walter=svobodadiaries/Alexander Richard Svoboda. Maybe my post at WP:Copyright problems on 22 Nov wasn't sufficiently clear, but there are additional files in the same state:
i.e. copied from the Svobodapedia site without a clear license at that site that allows copying. — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 13:35, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Military history reviewers' award | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons for reviewing a Milhist article at PR, GAN, ACR or FAC during the period October to December 2017. Thank you for supporting Wikipedia's quality content processes.
Peacemaker67 (
click to talk to me) 04:58, 3 January 2018 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
I don't remember doing this, but thanks! — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 19:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
I noticed several edits (02:47, October 29, 2017 — 07:01, October 29, 2017) were (Redacted) in the article Head transplant. As you are the last editor of of that time period with sysop privileges, I assume it is you who did that. If not please correct me. Why were these actions taken? I am curious. Thank you. Nikolaiho ☎️ 📖 03:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa, Happy New Year. Every time I come I see this beautiful template. Reminds me of a similar one, the Type 3 template for wordpress at the turn of the century, that I used to blog on. The above article is 98.5% copyvio. Highest I have ever seen. I thought it might be attempt to migrate the website to Wikipedia. I have sent an email to the website owner, to see if that is what is happening. I can't see it, it looks brand new, and indeed is new, 2015-16 scope_creep ( talk) 21:29, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
The edit was copied from Boomerang's page (the horse he rode) all accomplishments the horse achieve were achieved with Eddie as the rider. Therefore I do not see an issue as both Eddie (the rider) and Boomerang (the horse) achieved the same awards. Boomerang's wiki page is much more detailed than Eddie's and I thought it was only fair the Eddie share the same detailed accomplishments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.52.95.130 ( talk) 22:52, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Do you think "Michellevford" and "Michwit" are the same person, or at least meatpuppets? They each posted the exact same passage. 331dot ( talk) 22:57, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
CopyVio, CopyVio, Probable. Check their contributions, I think there are more. - Mar11 ( talk) 04:46, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
thank you for your help!
Sardinhapao (
talk) 12:16, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
92.29.159.166 appears to be another IP sock. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 15:23, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
I saw your concerns regarding copyright infringement on the page Dean Winslow. I have obtained permission in the form of an email from Stanford (I'm not sure where to include it in the article). Quite frankly, I don't understand how they could even own the copyright to this information simply because it is listed on their website. It is factual information and appears in several locations on the internet. Please help me wrap my head around the idea that an entity besides Dean Winslow himself could claim the copyrights to a description of his career.
Samwinslow ( talk) 20:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Some of the content you included in Pascal-p2 has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:38, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
The "history" section that you deleted was written by me. I don't see how I can proceed to write this article if you DELETE the material I write for that. Of course it is not copyrighted. I have no intention of copyrighting what I write here.
Never mind. I give up. Writing for wikipedia is too much of a pain in the rear.
Feel free to delete the article. I am not going to write for wikipedia again.
PS. The reason you decided this was copyrighted was because it was similar to what was found on a web site. IF YOU HAD ACTUALLY LOOKED AT IT, instead of just seeing your search matched, you would have seen:
1. That is was MY WEB SITE!!! so of course the content was similar. I WROTE IT!!! 2. That there was NO COPYRIGHT NOTICE ON IT, OR INDEED ANYWHERE ON THE WEB SITE. 3. That in fact that web site specificially says "ALL MATERIAL HERE IS PUBLIC DOMAIN".
So now wikipedia is mainly concerned with not getting sued over copyright. Not with actual content, just your legal rear end. Congradulations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samiam95124 ( talk • contribs) 02:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa! Thank you for editing my draft article draft:Mark Wexler. This is my first time submitting so I appreciate your help! I am trying to make the changes you suggested but I'm not sure what specifically needs work. I read the help pages on quotations, copyright, etc. In the draft, I used quotes and footnoted sources in the reference section. Was the quote too long? Did I footnote things incorrectly? I'm sorry to ask such newbie questions but I don't even know where to start. If you could point me in the right direction so I can make the article better I would really appreciate it. Thanks! AskMK ( talk) 19:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for contacting me on that edit.
Sadly I can't seem to find a way to see what exactly was removed so I can't understand the reasons. In the history tab my edit date has a strikethrough and the usual diff buttons are disabled.
There's a huge amount of misuse of that word, "viral". Huge. Everyone seems to think that if a video or article or other media item has a lot of views, then it's a viral story. That is categorically wrong. My intention is to try to convey that information in its rightful place. Please let me know how can this be worked out. (PS: why did you ask to talk here and not in my talk page where you created the OP?) -- Nmaxcom ( talk) 12:14, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa... I thank you so much for showing me the steps to using copyright here on Wikipedia. Also, thank you for showing me how to follow and understand the practices used for contributions. I did not ask for permission before adding the info to the article, but I have an issue asking for permission, because sometimes it takes a while for the copyright holder to answer my questions I may have or an email I may send to them. I do not have any questions, but I will read all that you wrote on my talk page. I felt silly removing what you wrote from my talk page, but I can still view them, even though I removed them from my talk page. I want to be a better editor on here, and I certainly want to expand articles classified as stubs on here. I will continue to leave messages on your talk page if I do happen to have any questions, and I appreciate you giving me the permission to do so. Also, I hope you are having a great new year, and that you and your family had a wonderful Christmas. Just to let you know, my username is pronounced "callman" not "Coleman." Thanks! Colman2000 ( talk) 16:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, thanks for your attention.
I'm working on the draft article for the late musician Doug Lunn. On December 12 you said, "Material you included in the above draft appears to have been copied from the copyright web page http://www.fretlessbass.com/lunn-doug. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake."
I am in contact with Fretless Bass website founder Eric Larson by email and phone. He has given me permission to quote from his interview with Doug. Please let me know what proof of permission is required by Wikipedia. I've searched but can't seem to find info on this issue. Does Eric need to submit an email or complete a form to verify his permission to quote from the interview?
Please point me to related articles or advise me on the best way to proceed. Thanks.
Art101 ( talk) 21:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello! You rejected the article FxPro based on the arguments from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FxPro. However, the article was different from the remote version and was revised in accordance with Wikipedia rules. How can I resume the discussion on the article? -- Darislaw ( talk) 22:51, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
...on this? Beyond My Ken ( talk) 07:56, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
ANSWER: No the Material was not copied from another web site. To the contrary, AFTER I edited the Wikipedia page, someoneelse copied the Wikipedia page and pasted into his or her own web page. Someone copied Wikipedia content and used in their own page. The edit is 100% original from me. People copies Wikipedia and post them in other pages. That is what this person did Aroniel2 ( talk) 13:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Just so you know User:Navid.amirpour restored probably the same COPYVIO from the same source 3 hours after you rev del'd and issued a warning [2]. I've requested revdel again, but there also seems to be a COI issue on the page, and since you already issued an admin warning I thought I should let you know. SeraphWiki ( talk) 02:17, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your message regarding an edit I made on the above mentioned article. I've made some changes (really just added two sentences)and would appreciate your consideration.-- DanJazzy ( talk) 13:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, I just pulled out the Plot and Character sections from this article, which appear to have been copied directly from the publicity blurbs for the 2017 movie made out of the (1992) novel. They appear to have been there pretty much from the beginning of the article. I'll let you decide whether any iterations need to be hidden. Thanks as always for your help. BlueMoonset ( talk) 17:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
I don't think that this was clear-cut copyright violation necessitating RevisionDelete. I find RevDel frustrating in this case because it takes a lot of time to figure out what changes were made. The material in this case is substantially similar to the info in the company (Galapagos NV)'s annual report ( https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1421876/000119312517093838/d333278d20f.htm). Arguably, much of the information in the annual report falls under fair use because it is a regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. And it does not seem to be a creative work. By overusing RevDel, you are foiling wikipedia editors without being constructive. There is a more constructive way of handling this situation, e.g. by quoting the material in question. (I apologize for being frustrated.) Glennchan ( talk) 20:03, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Blatant copyright violations that can be redacted without removing attribution to non-infringing contributors... Best practices for copyrighted text removal can be found at WP:Copyright problems and should take precedence over this criterion.The part you're quoting is a follow-up sentence from the previous regarding
"ordinary" offensive comments. Copyright can and shall be removed and revdel'd when it is found. Primefac ( talk) 20:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC) ( talk page stalker)
Hi,
User:Wanderlust2003/sandbox appears to have been copied from https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-is-jupiter-58.html. As a US government agency, that's public domain, am I right? If so, does it still need attribution? Thanks. Adam9007 ( talk) 00:31, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
The information I had for Benny Ramos came from the Spanish Wikipedia site which KingJamesBand.com copy and pasted on to their own site. I was unaware Spanish Wikipedia was copyrighted so my mistake. JJsCat ( talk) 15:22, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Good morning, Diannaa. I saw your removal of my addition to the SH-AWD page due to copyright. Sorry about that, I didn't realize press releases were copyright-protected (but I see that after a quick search).
Question for you: This site: http://hondanews.com/channels/tlx-press-kit/releases/2015-acura-tlx-powertrain has the same information. Undoubtedly they got that information from the source I'd originally cited. That hondanews.com has been used as the citation for all other models. So I guess I'm confused, as it appears hondanews.com is just mirroring the acura.com press releases. Wouldn't that make all those citations examples of infringement? Or can I re-post with the new link without danger of being labeled a "persistent violator"? Ziwcam ( talk) 16:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. Please tell me where my article is that I worked on last night till midnight, eyes watering, head spinning. I want to see what I wrote that you say copyright violations exist. I did not copy from website meanmary.com/bio. This info is all over the place. I even have Mean Mary's permission to use whatever I need. She sent me a Word doc that I have been pulling info from.
Can you bring back that article so I can continue with my editing. I will try to paraphrase more. How can I show you I have permission?
Thank you. KarenPolka ( talk) 19:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)Karen
Is this version better to your liking? Didn't realize a cited to biography was copyrighted lol. If you see something you think is problematic, a more measured approach would be trying fix it or ask someone to fix it. Instead of taking a carte blanche approach. We're here to contribute and improve. Not sure deleting an Associate Justice of the South Dakota Supreme Court is expanding our human knowledge or in conjunction of the philosophy of Wikipedia. I'd be happy for you to prove me otherwise.
Koncurrentkat ( talk) 01:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Right, but thats why I cited to it?Its biographical information. Reorganized even? Why didn't you try fixing it? Often, people who propose everything for deletion, have no solution. I'm not sure what you achieved here. And can I see your legal citations please? And the current version not be ok? That information currently just reorganized from the source. You should propose the current article for deletion under that reasoning. Koncurrentkat ( talk) 04:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Koncurrentkat ( talk) 13:42, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Applicable law: SDCL 2-16-8 with reference to 2-16-6. I didn't know edicts of South Dakota state government were copyrighted? I recall you saying This page appears to be a direct copy from https://news.sd.gov/newsitem.aspx?id=22435. It wasn't a direct copy, however, as I was asking earlier from you, it is not copyrighted. Have a measured response of researching then correcting, instead of this carte blanche deletion method and then telling people when they don't belong here. Here, take a look at this page I created: United States Attorney for the District of South Dakota. Tell me what I did wrong instead of carte blanche deleting it. Koncurrentkat ( talk) 15:52, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Re: Kundalini
Hi - I am perplexed about your deletion of my quote from Bulhman's book. Was it the referenced quote that was copyright material? Or are you saying that I plagiarized the Editor's description of Buhlman's history which is on Amazon? If that is the case, I will redo the lead-in sentense by using statement below which is taken from a review I wrote about Buhlman's book that is published in The Journal of the Academy For Spiritual and Consciousness Studies Vol 38, Number 2 November, 2015. . . And then I will include the Quote from his book "The Secret of The Soul" referencing the page.
"The book is structured around the results of a ten-year OBE survey, made available in an earlier book and on his website. It has generated 18,000 responses demonstrating the OBE is common and cross-cultural After four decades of personal experience and research he views self-initiated OBE’s as the most powerful method available to accelerate evolution and spiritual enlightenment. He asserts that OBE’s, NDE’s, Transcendental States, Kundalini and Alien Contact are results of a natural ongoing expansion and evolution of consciousness."
I am clarifying because there are so many editors on Wikipedia who invalidate any mention of "Out of Body" Travel and consider it a "Fringe Material" and delete it as such. Thank you so much for saving me and Wikipedia from any chance of copyright infringement Cybersister27 ( talk) 15:43, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello and a belated welcome to 2018 from me. We've got a problem at Padmashali which appears to go right back to its creation in 2007. I've just posted a note at Talk:Padmashali#Copyright but have no idea how we can deal with this given the number of mirrors. Any ideas? - Sitush ( talk) 22:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I made some edits to the page regarding downloadable content. I originally made it years ago but they were eventually edited. It was incomplete and said "the following content" but there was no content listed. I reworked it but please next time don't remove the edits and close all old edits, just the "wrong" parts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.15.165.111 ( talk) 12:47, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Well, you or someone else locked the older edits from view, so i can't find them anymore. It was the one made on 24 June 2015, anyway. Now i simply added some generic info and used your link as a source for some of the things that were listed in that page. Again, it's better than nothing, as the original edit said "the following blahblahblah" but there was nothing after that because it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.15.165.111 ( talk) 21:55, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. I have a quick question for you about use of text licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 on Wikipedia. I've just discovered Principles for Digital Development, which makes use of text from https://digitalprinciples.org/, which is marked as CC BY-SA 4.0. I was about to add the correct attribution to the article, but then paused because I wasn't sure this was compatible with CC BY-SA 3.0 and the GFDL. Do you happen to know? Cordless Larry ( talk) 14:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Hey there. I stumbled across Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Lucas, which was sent to AfD as a copyvio concern (it being the wrong place technically im not worried about), but the thing is I honestly can't tell if it's a copyvio or a backwards copyvio, so I'm not sure if I should scrap and try and rewrite the article anyway (it's in piss-poor shape regardless of the copyvio, in my opinion). Thoughts on this one? The more I go down the archive rabbit hole the more questions I have. Wizardman 16:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I wanted to tell you that after one of your edits of the article for Material handling ended up making the beginning paragraph get all messed up, and I'm not a talented enough editor to fix it lol.
Jordanmiller335 ( talk) 01:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
The deleted article was about a TV series that aired in 2017, while the alleged duplicate King Naresuan (film) is about a hexalogy of films that were released between 2007 and 2015. Please restore. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 03:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, thanks for spotting the copyright issue on Principles for Digital Development (CC BY-SA 3.0 on wikipedia vs. CC BY-SA 4.0 on the Principles site). I tried to move the page back into my user space. This left a redirect behind from article space to user space (which I failed to spot) and the page was promptly deleted by User:RHaworth. I have contacted User:RHaworth about restoring the page to my user space, but so far this hasn't happened. To me it looks like that your reason (copyright) and User:RHaworth's reason (redirect) were different, and that the article could be improved by editing, particularly given that I had added independent work to the article, that was free of copyright restrictions ("If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page.", Wikipedia:Deletion_policy).
Regarding the copyright issue: I have informal endorsement/permission for posting to Wikipedia already, via a public forum post on the Principles site.
In any case, I have followed this up with a more formal request to get permission using the Wikipedia process. I would suggest that (a) I re-edit the page, and (b) place {{ OTRS pending}} onto the page, while the permissions are being being processed?
What do you think? Bjohas ( talk) 11:00, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
(Also see, User talk:RHaworth.)
C.f. also Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#G12._Unambiguous_copyright_infringement
This applies to text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. For equivocal cases that do not meet speedy deletion criteria (such as where there is a dubious assertion of permission, where free-content edits overlie the infringement, or where there is only partial infringement or close paraphrasing), the article or the appropriate section should be blanked with {{ subst: Copyvio}}, and the page should be listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems.
On the basis of this ("a dubious assertion of permission", i.e. permission with the Digital Principles forum, rather than formally by email to WMF; also "free-content edits overlie the infringement" for the additional section created), I'd like to make the case for restoring the page the article space, and removing the speedy deletion nomination, while taking the above actions (as in (a)/(b) above, with {{ OTRS pending}} as a reasonable way forward). What do you think? Bjohas ( talk) 11:46, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I am not too familiar with copyright law but are lyrics to songs copyrighted or just the song themselves (the melody, lyrics, etc as a whole). There are plenty of sites online that will list lyrics for many songs, why can't wikipedia? EvilxFish ( talk) 11:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I saw you did some cleanup at Draft:Smart pill ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). I took a look at it, and am wondering if it should just be deleted entirely?
The first section for "World’s First Electronic Smart Pill Approval" is a simple copy/paste of the firat two paragraphs from the press release. [3] the first sentence of the section "Should you use Smart Pills?" is a minor tweak to a well known quote by Myles Munroe. [4]
I honestly stopped reviewing at that point. Your thoughts? Should the draft be kept as potentially salvageable, or cut losses with view that a full rewrite from scratch is best? --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 15:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
While new page reviewing, I have come across an article Chat Garcia Ramilo which has some material copied and pasted from a website that states "Unless otherwise stated, content on the APC website is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0". Is this compatible with Wikipedia? Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 19:33, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I saw you did some editing work by simply deleting entire passages and its references. I could have rephrase it as requested, but I don't have any chance to do it now (review the material) since you have deleted it permanently. Would it be possible now to ask you to share the full text (before your revision)? So I can correct it? Diannaa You have deleted about 3365 words. I think it is rough and it would be better to live you comment instead to adjust my not sufficient paraphrasing or request other people to do it [5] SeaAisina ( talk) 01:16, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for removing copyrighted material from Rajiv Shah (I can't show the true Diff because you eradicated the two preceding revisions), but you missed an even greater problem there, which is that most of the material related to Raj Shah rather than Rajiv Shah and didn't belong in this article at all. — Anomalocaris ( talk) 08:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, you have left me a message regarding copyright in my edit of Lucille Tenazas. I did not copy anything from the site you mention. Can you please be more specific. The only similarities I find are in elements like her titles Associate Dean and Henry Wolf Professor in the School of Art, Media and Technology (AMT) at Parsons The New School for Design in New York, which is not something anyone can claim copyright for, or her list of clients, ditto.-- Megustalastrufas ( talk) 15:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Dianna. I wonder if you could offer some advice? Would you hazard a guess as to who might hold the copyright for this image? (I often think of Wikipedia when I see this image, for some reason). More generally, of course, my question relates to works of art reproduced on items of clothing or domestic ware, e.g a Mona Lisa kitchen apron. Many thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:33, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Apologies for not adding the CE attribution. Was about to, but I noticed it already had a link to the Wikisource article, which I supposed indicated it was PD; and at the time, it seemed like over-kill. Mannanan51 ( talk) 21:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
If you are going to place a copyvio tag on an article then I'd appreciate it if you would do a thorough check on it first. When I create an article this is one of the things I always do & in this case the Earwig's Copyvio Detector report states 7.4% Violation Unlikely for the ABC article/reference. There are only three examples of identical phrases of five or more words - one of which is clearly the a generic title, the Australian Comics Hall of Fame, which is used in multiple references - the other two are easy and minor fixes. I don't appreciate shoddy work and the placement of a warning which is clearly not warranted. Dan arndt ( talk) 01:47, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Dianna. Thanks for editing this page to address your concerns. Just to be sure I understand the status - with these changes, it is now clear to continue in the review process? Thanks. trix70 Trix70 ( talk) 02:01, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Please take a look here where what looks like an entire song lyric was randomly copy-pasted. Reverted by ClueBot, but probably copyright, so RevDel?— Odysseus 147 9 03:11, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
I thought the changes had been modified sufficiently not to infringe copyright. I will review and adapt further. I work for ISBT clinical transfusion working group so do want to enter some of information albeit it modified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TransfusionDoctor ( talk • contribs) 13:06, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
I am not paid by ISBT nor are they my employer. We are a group of people who are trying to promote better transfusion practice. One way of doing this is by providing free information on wikipedia and highlighting additional places where people can source free information. I actually work for the NHS, our aim is to provide unbiased information that is not influenced by any particular country TransfusionDoctor ( talk) 13:15, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
How can I explicitly provide permission for material that ISBT has agreed can be used on wikipedia and is publically accessible on the ISBT page? TransfusionDoctor ( talk) 13:37, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, This is LaShonda Katrice Barnett and I just want to thank you for sending along the email with all the information on proper protocol for making page edits. I initially logged on last month because there was erroneous data on my page, degrees listed were wrong and other things. I'm pleased with how the page looks now. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.48.25 ( talk) 15:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa......My local cable TV provider (Optimum) recently added the Olympic Channel to its channel lineup at channel 225. Over the course of the several months leading up to the US skating Nationals, my wife and I were able to watch on this cable TV channel the current international ice skating competitions as well as past Olympic competitions. The Olympic Channel's content is similar to, and I occasionally see programming interchanged with, the NBC Sports Channel. The NBC Sports Channel is designed to compete directly with ESPN and is of similar programming quality as ESPN. My observation is that the Olympic Channel offers high quality, commentated, quality edited, programming - nearly on par with the ESPN channel. Given the quality of the Olympic Channel programming, I thought it worthwhile to mention the Channel's market penetration, thereby giving people something to use to prod their local cable providers. On 13 January 2018, you replaced my footnote referenced disclosure of this cable channel with the non-referenced statement: "In 2017, NBCUniversal launched a linear version of the Olympic Channel over-the-top internet television service in cooperation with the USOC." May I ask the basis for your use of the words "linear version" (as opposed to well edited and inter-spaced}, "over-the-top" (as opposed to commentated and analyzed), and "Internet television" (as opposed to cable television) as the words appear to be misstatements of the facts? If you are ever in the New York City area, I'd like to invite over to my home to experience for yourself the US cable television Olympic Channel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attorney18 ( talk • contribs) 05:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Dianna. We have a difficult case at Meena Kumari ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Aside from large-scale copyvios, there is edit-warring by one of the regulars restoring the copyvios. Best regards. Dr. K. 05:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. I marked revisions of Walter Willison for deletion on copyvio grounds, and subsequently realised that the violation dates back to the very first revision of the page (Earwig didn't initially pick this up, for some reason). I'm just flagging this up in case you feel that it is necessary to delete the whole thing. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:36, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, the copyright holder have submitted the certificates of the two pictures File:Shinji Okazaki BFA 2016.jpg. and File:Elkeson BFA 2013.jpg regarding copyrights to wiki permission email. I am waiting for the reply. Hopefully there will not be problems with the two pictures and they can be retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ujishadow ( talk • contribs) 09:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
{{
OTRS pending}}
tags. Getting the emails cleared will likely take quite a while, as they have a huge backlog right now. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 12:57, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Hello D. In doing some maintenance work I came across this article Kakha Bendukidze and this section of another article Free University of Tbilisi#Kakha_Bendukidze. There seems to have been some cut/paste editing involved. Unfortunately I can't find where it happened so I don't know whether any "attribution" edits are needed or not. My apologies for not being more thorough in this but I thought you should take a look when you have time - just in case. Best regards. MarnetteD| Talk 17:51, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I found a draft in the user space of User:XYGyn that never made its way to being an article. The last edit this user contributed was in 2013. Can I give this editor attribution when the draft is completed and transferred to mainspace? Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 21:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi - Please can you tell me why you deleted the info for 2016 review? You kept 2011 which was there previously but removed the 2016 which I added to update the information already there? (I understand your removal of the quote which was there before - thought I removed that as opinion so thanks!) Thanks Hellinadustcart ( talk) 23:52, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Sorry - don't really get this - the information from the 2011 review is in there from the review I just put in the information from 2016? Have updated in same way hope that's okay now? Results from ombudsmen should be available on Wikipedia? Thanks Hellinadustcart ( talk) 11:52, 18 January 2018 (UTC) Oh oh finally penny dropped d'oh!
There is currently a large copyright violation at Dean Winslow. See these diffs. This same copyright violation has been added several times before, and you revision deleted it in the past, so I'm contacting you now to request that you do so again. Thanks! Marquardtika ( talk) 04:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I've e-mailed you about a BLP violation that probably needs revdel; sorry to add to your workload. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:44, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. I haven't pestered you in awhile, so I figured it's about time to do so again. Someone just added a big chunk of unsourced content to D. K. Shivakumar. I'd post a diff, but I don't want to create any more cleanup if my hunch is right. Anyway, I just scanned through it brielfy and it has the feel of a copy-and-paste type of copyvio of stuff taken from an external website. Is there a way to check something like this? As least to be sure before I start going in and creating more diffs which might need revdeleting. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 10:54, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. There appears to be considerable overlap between the Wikipedia article and the source. Although the source is noted as being in the Public Domain, surely verbatim duplication is not permitted, or is it? Thanks. Woodlot ( talk) 15:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello - I see that you reviewed the draft page for Kevin Nagle but I am not sure what that means for the status of the page as it says it is still pending review? I am being asked for an update so am hoping to be able to provide a status, but I cannot tell from what the page says. Thank you - Erin ErinD22 ( talk) 20:04, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
I maintain the AFC decline comments page, and I didn't know that we have a switch for cv declines. Neato. I'll be sure to pass this along to the troops. Primefac ( talk) 16:03, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
I asked for permission after you reverted my edit and this is the response I got:
You are free to use the content from our History of Parole in Canada page, at no cost, as long as the Parole Board of Canada is listed as the source.
Thank you.
Best regards, Iulia Pescarus Popa Correspondence Unit Parole Board of Canada
Is this good enough?
Whitebro (
talk)
Whitebro (
talk) 19:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, the article has problems with promotional tone, but I suspect there may be copyright issues as well. When you have the chance.....Thank you very much, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 20:56, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, revdel needed for this edit if you could please do the honours? Copy/paste from here. Thanks. - Sitush ( talk) 13:03, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Yuwa-india Sorry, too terse: 'original prose should not be prepared'. Why did you drop the programs own vision statement (quote)? I restored the quote, added the term 'vision statement' and tweaked the order to be more historic.
It's a start. Hopefully someone will beef it up later.
BTW: The Edge feature article is mostly self-serving, although any publicity is good. The lead pic Edge used for the article is a stock photo, completely unrepresentative of the facilities at Yuwa, but that's another story...
I'm not a wiki frequent flyer these days. It may be awhile until it get back to this 19:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Nokia N91 - Removal copyright
Hi. Thanks for removing the copyright part. The info was written by a mobile industry veteran named Eldar Murtazin which I used and cited. The technical specs of Hard drive are available on the web just like other specs of the phone. Not sure why that was removed as well.
If I write the entire thing in my own words and cite it properly would that be okay? The reason I ask because all the other info that's written was done the same way by others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahully2j ( talk • contribs) 04:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa I am the Historian for the Hamilton Police Service. The information posted in Canadian Correctional Workers belong to us and I have the authority to release it. I’m not understanding why it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cstdavek ( talk • contribs) 17:04, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmilon ( talk • contribs) 13:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Can you confirm that it is safe to cut and paste a paragraph from School uniform which is licensed under
Open government license v 3 if I put a statement in References before {{
reflist}}
that says:
or do we have a ready made template. ClemRutter ( talk) 10:56, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
{{
OGL-attribution}}
. Your blurb is fine. Here's mine, I have it in a sandbox: "
Your magic wand would be useful for this edit, which comes from here. Thanks. - Sitush ( talk) 15:41, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, There is a recently created user Alikhan090 ( talk · contribs) who has been repeatedly uploading Copy-right images to the English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. First by providing the source and then under false claim of ownership. I think a warning or a small block might be warranted. Also, how should we repeat such editors in the future? ARV does not expect these and I am not aware of another mechanism. Thanks. Adamgerber80 ( talk) 15:49, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
I am only one of two english-speaking researcher working in Poum. I spent time there interviewing, and wrote an article. You have not only removed all my edits, but it is impossible to get them back. Why? The article I used in the wiki was written by me, and the reference is to the DRAFT copy, not the final version which Taylor&Francis have copyright for (unfortunately). They do not have copyright to a submitted word document at all. Even if they did, you can still quote from a published article - I am also a journal editor and know the rules. All this is a net loss to the readers and I have no real memory of all the changes, in order to recreate them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Batterbu ( talk • contribs)
Hi Diannaa, I removed those parts of content which you think promotional and amended to the most moderate version. Thanks microsoftguru
Hi Dianna, my page was deleted for copyright enfringment. i'm the system admin and i want a wikipedia page in english too, 'cause i have that in italian, bit i don't find the option to link them in between. Hope that you reply soon please! i wait for work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlessandroRibola1993 ( talk • contribs)
Wallis Budge was one of the biggest Egyptologists and Orientalists in the history he was born in 1857 and he died in 1934.he wrote many famous books such an english translation for The book of the dead which was written in egyptian hieroglyphs ,he also mentioned the etymology of alchemy at least twice,for example in page 19 of his book "Egyptian Magic" and in page 443 of his book "Amulets and Superstitions". so i didn't use a text from another contributor in wikipedia further Wallis Budge didn't even mention the word "chemistry" in this topic,just check page 19 of his book "Egyptian Magic"and you have a direct access to this page through google books,Thanks
Hello,
You have recently added a template "too long" to the article of Lithuania, which size currently is 218 573 bites. Article of the United States is named as a Good Article and its size is 402 034 bites. Article of France size is 299 585 bites and it is not yet a GA/FA (only B-class), which means when it will reach such quality it will also be around 400 000 bites. Article of Italy size is 230 235 bites and it is also only a B-class article, which means it requires further expansion and inevitably it will cause rise of its size. It is clear that articles of countries have different standards (especially in the United States case when such a long article is named as a GA) because it requires comprehensive information about various fields. Creating a comprehensive and high quality article about country which is about 100 000 bites is impossible (according to Wikipedia:Article size articles bigger than 100 000 bites should be split). As a result, I believe that your added template "too long" from the article of Lithuania should be removed and only a discussion could be started in its talk page if it really has some issues. -- Pofka ( talk) 18:44, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. You may want to take a look. Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:52, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi,
Could you confirm whether or not there was indeed a copyvio (I think there was) and whether I was being stupid (I think I misread the copyright notice). Does this need revdel? Thanks. Adam9007 ( talk) 02:16, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Dianna, looks like there's loads of copyvio in this article. Could you take a look? — LeoFrank Talk 05:48, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Some of the material you included in the above article appears to have been copied from the copyright article http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/354389. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 00:29, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello.
There's a dispute whether this edit (and subsequent edits which show the link) should be revision deleted for violation of WP:COPYVIOEL.
@ Primefac, TonyBallioni, and Dlohcierekim: I'm pinging you because previously you have participated in similar discussion wearing an admin hat, and I'm explaining the history below. I believe the violating link (one diff above) need to be revdel'd as soon as possible, but the rest of this discussion is not urgent.
A history of related actions:
Sorry for TLDR, but I wanted everybody, including people without admin tools, to understand the full background because I want to put an end to this and focus on something more constructive. I don't know a better forum for this (maybe WP:AN?).
So, I have these questions:
Thanks. Politrukki ( talk) 11:39, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Policy forbids linking to a URL which hosts copyrighted material without permission. The link was removed, in harmony with policy. Revdel is normally used to hide outing, grossly insulting accusations, and severe BLP violations, not for links. It just disappears into the mists of revision history fog. Done. (I can imagine a URL which is grossly insulting which should be revdeled, but this isn't one of them. This one is famous and commonly used by normal people, journalist, and politicians, not creeps.)
This particular link is extremely well-known, as it's to one of the most notable political documents of the last year. Pretty much all major news sources mention and/or discuss the Trump–Russia dossier every single day. It's not every day that a sitting president is accused of being a Manchurian candidate, with more and more evidence coming forward which indicates there may be something to it. Indictments and arrests are already occurring to people very close to the president.
I use Google alerts to keep track of it, and it's hard to do. Major RS link to it all the time, and quote from it, and we are allowed to quote from copyrighted material within fair use limits. (Any copyright issues are between the copyright holder and the offending website, and have no effect on "fair use" rights or our ability to quote from said material.)
The dossier is actually hosted several places, and none fear reprisals from Steele or Fusion GPS. Keep in mind that Steele deliberately leaked the document to myriad sources. He wants it out there. I just wish that Fusion GPS would host it on their website for all to use. That would solve our problem. Fortunately major RS discuss and quote so much of it that it's available from their websites, where we can find relevant quotes to use in the context of how those RS discuss it. That's what we do here.
This is an attempt at WP:CREEP which must be nipped in the bud. Current policy is good enough. -- BullRangifer ( talk) 16:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Knowingly directing others to material that violates copyright might be considered contributory copyright infringement. Use of RD1 in these circumstances is arguably justified, and I don't think Primefac was out of line. TonyBallioni ( talk) 16:37, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I noticed you just declined the requested the deletion for TEC Edmonton. I believe the creator and only substantive author requested deletion here and here. I remain sceptical of the article's neutrality (paid creator/editor) and notability (particularly from the point of view of thin independent sources). With the author effectively giving up on the article, not sure how useful an AfD will be? Cheers, pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 13:26, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
In response to your edit on the above site,
https://www.york.gov.uk/copyright states (ironically at very minor risk to copyright):
you may use the content contained in this website for reproduction in connection with presentations, reports, printed material, and other similar uses which are publicly distributed or displayed free of charge, including advertisements, posters, catalogues, brochures, and leaflets.
So, please clarify...
-- The Equalizer ( talk) 16:33, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for taking the time to reviewthe page TEC Edmonton. I noticed you removed the COI tag after your review, which I appreciate as it was the logical thing to do. Can I go ahead and remove the WP Paid tag on the talk page now? I don't think it looks very good and it is also untrue as I received no compensation. If that tag cannot be removed, then please go ahead and delete the page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahroze ( talk • contribs) 22:26, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I stumbled on the above TP after I went to leave a message about maintenance template deletions but found it full of 'content' or draft which appears to copy extensively from here. Seems this is a new user who might need some pointers. As the vio is in userspace, I have not removed it (yet) not being sure if that would be the correct way to proceed. Can you help? Thanks. Eagleash ( talk) 00:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa- Re: List of William T. Hornaday Award Gold Medal recipients. Your critique seems to lack depth of content and, thus, frustrates the honest contributor. That is... I'm not sure I follow your argument. What I have offered is a simple, straight forward, highlight-reel, fact list of accomplishments of each recipient (as best I can find them and edit them) in a few phrases set off by semicolons or in one to two sentences. For the reader, this briefly helps explain why the recipient made the list. The entries are too short to pull discernible passages from anyone else's work - certainly nothing that would constitute "intellectual property." Nevertheless, I use footnotes and cite sources where the reader can read the source article and learn more, and... well... to cite sources for the content in the way that meets with generally accepted, academic standards. I will be happy to redraft something if you feel that I have missed the mark, but you will have to be more specific in identifying exactly what is at risk and how I need to make edits. The list entry you mentioned as being at risk for copyright infringement is a simple list of five facts, is footnoted and cited (in the footnote) with an external link to the cited source. In fact, I have sought to cite at least one source and external link for as many of the entries as possible. Perhaps I should ask what format would be more acceptable / defendable with regard to safeguarding copyrights? Should every paraphrased entry include the repetitive intro text "according to (cited source)..." before listing the accomplishment, or should paraphrased entries be set off with quotes, anyway, despite being paraphrased and cited? Please offer further detail and clarification. Thanks. B93 ( talk) 03:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello Dianne
I am working on the near-death experience page. Reference 47 is being used more than once. I have been trying to add a simple refname inside the first <ref> code, but do not succeed. References are insidea special code "Reflist | 30em" -- I am stuck. Any advice please? Have a great day Josezetabal ( talk) 08:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
{{reflist}}
template in the majority of instances where it occurs.
Eagleash (
talk) 09:38, 30 January 2018 (UTC)Hi Diannaa. Please could you take a look at the article for Folco Quilici? A user is adding vast ammounts of text from another website, but they claim WP:MYTEXT applies. Any help with this matter would be much appreciated. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, would you mind evaluating this diff for revdel? Mortee ( talk) 15:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
D - see this article page. Would you please consider temp page protection for auto-confirmed users. Kierzek ( talk) 19:00, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Could you look at the 'Plot summary' section of this article please. It has a tag from 2015 with the copyvio material available in the edit window. This looks like it's been reported twice and has a directly applied template. Debouch ( talk) 21:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi.
Is there a template for displaying that the content in some article has been copied from a public domain? Specifically from {{
PD-USGov}}? Kindly ping me while replying, regards, —usernamekiran
(talk) 23:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
{{
PD-notice}}
. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 23:59, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
{{
PD-notice}}
is perfect for incorporating inside a citation. There's a selection of US templates for
Category:United States government attribution templates that are intended for use at the bottom of an article. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 00:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank You | |
Thank you for reviewing articles during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive. Always more to do, but thanks for participating. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 05:17, 31 January 2018 (UTC) |
Dear Diannaa, Can I ask why you removed Yehuda Bauer's referenced comment from the Wannsee Conference page? Bauer is without question the world's leading expert in Holocaust history, holding an esteemed position at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and therefore his opinion on Wannsee is surely of great importance? I am baffled that you have deleted it. Thanks for your time. BookyDong ( talk) 16:40, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Last week, you reverted and warned Brently Perumal ( talk · contribs) on E! about the addition of copyrighted material about the South African version of the network; the user restored the material and hidden-noted that they were 'one of the Editors on www.tvsa.co.za and the the authority', suggesting a definite COI account (the site they're with seems to be a press release regurgitation site with little original content). I dug in and noticed that Zee World has also had COI fingerprints all over it and I had to revert to a clean July 2017 version to remove all of those issues. I'm tagging them with COI but judging from the COPYVIO restoration, I think they haven't gotten the point at all about it. Nate • ( chatter) 17:34, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there - just to let you know that I've now recreated the page, without the use of CC BY-SA 4.0 materials. Many thanks! Bjohas ( talk) 19:59, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, sorry about the copyright screwup. I thought I had sufficiently reworded it. My bad. Thanks for your help. I am just glad I didn't lose much more of the editing, which evidently passed muster. Yours, Quis separabit? 21:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hey @Diannaa The Drake Foundation Wiki page is being edited so please can you take a look and approve please. Many thanks Sunil — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunil chauhan2018 ( talk • contribs) 20:38, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
{{subst:submit}}
to the top of the draft page. This will get your draft in the queue for approval. This process may take a while as there's quite a backlog. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 23:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)Hi Diannaa. Could you take a look at Chatham Granite Club as well as Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2018 February 2 and make I did everything correctly? It appears that quite a bit of the history section was copied-and-pasted from the club's official website. I'm not sure how far back it goes who who intitially added it, but the content has been there for quite a while and has just been moved around a bit is some recent updates. I think it goes back to content added by IP 70.24.45.213 in September 25, 2015 at 22:49 (I'm not providing diffs so as to not create any more cleanup). This might mean that every edit since then will have to be revdel. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:12, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, ILoveCaracas has been moving some pages without first seeking consensus or discussing it in the article's discussion page. I left the user a message yesterday on one move with which I do not agree, this one since, that means, that, for the sake of consistency, other articles on Spanish cities or towns would also have to be moved to indicate the province instead of just, in this case, Zaragoza, as it appears in Spanish wiki. I could live with it, but this recent move, today, is not, in my opinion, correct. As I just explained to the user, there were several "Cortes de León" in different years, some more relevant than others, but this one, the one in 1188, was particularly important and has its own separate article also in es.wiki (there is also a general article for Cortes de León). I am not sure how to go about it, reverting to the previous title. Could you please help? Also, perhaps you can tell the user that before he makes any move, he should first seek consensus or request the page move so that there may be some discussion before the move is made. Many thanks, Maragm ( talk) 12:14, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, so you recently edited the Randal Bryant page, and I wonder how can I see changes between the current and prev version? Also, the image was added from Prof. Bryant website. If there's no claim of legal license, can I contact him personally to ask for permission? How can I show the legality to wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosieswj ( talk • contribs) 14:43, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I really don't get the difference between your edits and what was there before. In my last edits I said that the material was from Tunisian cuisine, what am I supposed to do more ? Also, the content isn't exactly just copied, it is readapted (and often shortened) to the context in which it is used from its references. Asmodim ( talk) 16:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Tony just created Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to investigate copyright matters. It's probably different enough from Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests to not be considered overlap, so I thought I'd point it out to you. Primefac ( talk) 17:09, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Just an FYI to you and stalkers that I was looking over WP:CV today, and noticed that there wasn't an easy way to identify admins who were comfortable working in copyright, even though approaching an admin individually is often the easiest way to handle copyright issues for people who aren't that familiar with the policy. I went ahead and created the category to try to help. Thought you and anyone else who follows this page might be interested in it. TonyBallioni ( talk) 17:10, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, the usual--looks like nearly all of the history section was copied. Rev/deletion? Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 17:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
And lots of the same here. For when you have a quiet moment. Best, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 18:03, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
But so very much deserved. Thank you. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 18:29, 2 February 2018 (UTC) |
Thank you ~! — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 18:40, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I suspect that most of this article is a copyright violation, because it was copied from here, 88% match to current version (it's PBS but it's still copyrighted, I believe) and the last clean version is this 13 November 2012. I wasn't sure what to do, so I contacted you because I saw you active in the copyright sections. - kyykaarme ( talk) 10:29, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diana, Thank you for letting me know about Wikipedia attribution policy, which I did not know about. I have now implemented a link to Sugar candy. I am not sure how to carry out any other requirements that there may be, and would welcome your help. I am logging off now and may not be in touch for a few days. So please feel free to make any necessary attributions. 81.131.172.217 ( talk) 13:16, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa, I am writing about the modifications I recently did in the article about healthism. Thank you very much for your message and sorry for the absolutely involuntary infringement of the copyright code that Wikipedia adopts. Actually, I wrote the introduction of a special issue of an academic journal devoted to the topic of healthism and I thought to publish on Wikipedia a shorter version of this article, whose aim is to provide a map of this concept. Since the article is published under an open access journal (Eä) and then published in HAL, which is a French open archive where each author keeps their intellectual property rights, I would like to ask you, if I can release my intellectual property rights and publish on Wikipedia. Best regards, Mauroturrini ( talk) 18:44, 3 February 2018 (UTC) Mauroturrini
Hi Diannaa, Thanks for your message. I actually want to delete the file but don't know how and could not find any information on this. The image is already available under the name "Didier Stainier, PhD.jpg" on the German Wikipedia and this is the one I used when creating the article in my sandbox. I will be happy to delete it if you point me in the right direction. Thanks! Scairp4 ( talk) 15:24, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Diannaa, here's one that requires repeated protection against copyright violation. More rev/delete fun. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 16:54, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
This is User:Moscowamerican.
I used my "right to disappear"
Wikipedia:Clean_start to change my user name because of the treatment that I was receiving. I have not edited this article or any other since I changed user names.
I would like to formally dispute the deletion of Head transplant material. I was thinking about a formal request for comment. WP:RfC.
But maybe, just maybe (cross my fingers), we can resolve this here amicably without a formalized process.
Thoughts ma'am? Infinitepeace ( talk) 22:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Had an old 'watch this page' link to your page, found this icon (button?) and copied it. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is one of my all time favorit books. Cheers! Shir-El too 23:11, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, earlier on Sunday, Nihlus moved this from the published status to draft status which indicated it required review. Which might take 2-3 months. But now, at approximately 0240 UTC 5 February, you have simply deleted it with no explanation per your note on /info/en/?search=User:Martha.Savage/sandbox/Kelly_Robert_Savage (I do not know the proper way to reference a deleted page to you here). Does this constitute a review, with zero feedback? I Billspindler am not the original author, that was Martha.Savage . She added the original COI tag. I reviewed it and agreed to publish it as I do not have a similar conflict of interest. Can your explain and suggest a path forward? Thanks... Billspindler ( talk) 03:19, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
You scrubbed a stretch of the history of this article for copyvio, but I see the same IP restored text in this edit not long after. Am I being too cynical in suspecting it was substantially similar? If I should post this at some noticeboard, please let me know; I came to the article as a result of an AN/I report, and I'm not sure it's just the IP. Yngvadottir ( talk) 18:01, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
I really should have thought of that. the "ampersand" nbsp thing. You'd think after all those years of computers and webpages that I'd get something so simple. Sigh - guess retirement isn't all it's cracked up to be. Oh well - Thank you very much Diannaa — Ched : ? — 19:24, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I am a PhD student working with professors of international economics (from SIS, American University) to improve the quality of the page on comparative advantage, which is often consulted by our undergraduate students. I do not understand why you deleted the latest iteration of the section on "Deardorff's general law of comparative advantage", as it is simply a summary of a seminal article that needs to be mentioned in the page (we also had changed the wording of this summary based on your previous feedback) and as we cite the said article. I do not also understand why the section on "natural experiment of Japan" has been partially deleted and the adjacent figure removed: it does no longer make sense. The owners of the graph (Profs Daniel Bernhofen and John Brown) gave permission for this graph to be used on Wikipedia. I totally understand concerns about copyright: in this regard, would you mind being specific when you refuse an edit? Again, we are simply trying to improve a page that is often consulted by students and that currently does not reflect the nature of the academic research and debates on this issue. All best, Manreiii — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manreiii ( talk • contribs) 22:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi,
I've been looking at the Creative Commons website (specifically, here and here), and they both say that CC-BY-SA 1.0 text can only be reused under CC-BY-SA 1.0. Unless I'm much mistaken, this makes it incompatible with Wikipedia (because it uses CC-BY-SA 3.0). Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright lists CC-BY-SA 1.0 as compatible, but provides no source to back it up. Is there a problem here? If I'm right (and I hope I am not!), Template:CC-notice needs to be updated, and there may need to be a mass copyright cleanup operation. I really do hope this is a false alarm, but the way I'm interpreting what Creative Commons says, I don't see how we can use CC-BY-SA 1.0 text on Wikipedia. Am I missing something? Thanks. Adam9007 ( talk) 01:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
The version 1.0 ShareAlike licenses require that adaptations be made under exactly the same license as applied to the original work.Can someone ( Primefac, TonyBallioni?) please tell me I'm an idiot who has got this all wrong? Adam9007 ( talk) 02:13, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Good day Diannaa Just received notice of deleting one edit I done on the page - Under Section of Scientific Publications I added to my own publication one picture and added two sentences describing 10 years of my research in it. That has nothing to do with autobiography as you claim, or violating authors rights - I am the author. Can you please read what you deleted and realize that has nothing to do with person on the page but in two sentences summarize work that has been done through out 10 years of research. Sorry if I misunderstand it and delete this note, thank you. Kind Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robvancina ( talk • contribs) 04:05, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa I humble request to you. can you check the data in article Jaiswal Brahmin. There is maximum data without reference. Can you please remove unsourced data. Atrisomkshraj ( talk) 10:27, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, there was apparently significant copyvio on this article. Given how much of the article has been deleted, I'm guessing that a number of revisions should be hidden. Can you please take a look when you get the chance? Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 14:14, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Good morning, Diannaa, recent edits appear to have introduced copied content, and may require the mysterious magic of rev/deletion. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 15:08, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Can you delete the hymenectomy article so that I can get it right? I don't know what the problem is. This is the second time in two days that I've caused a copyright problem. I'm going to rework it offline to get it right and take more time in editing. Then I will re-create it. Thank you very much. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 16:31, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Diannaa, it's been a while! I though you might be able to give a quick answer to this: what do we do when we get a complaint that a fair-use image ( this one) is being used without permission from the copyright holder? The file is taken from here, and has a large "copyright" watermark across it. My own feeling is that we should respect the rights of the owner if there's been an objection, but I wondered if this has come up before, and if so, what the outcome was? For reference, OTRS ticket 2017073110012929. Thanks! Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 20:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, same COI account returned for same promotional and copyright violations. Thanks, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 00:58, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi again, Diannaa. I went to The Walt Disney Studio Licensing website, which tells users to ask permission and contact them for quotes (or somethig). I can assume that licensing any content belonging to Disney requires a fee, which is what Getty Images has done. How would this affect screenshots and posters, like Beauty and the Beast (1991 film) and one screenshot at The Golden Girls#Cast and characters? I thought about taking one of them to FFD, but I'd like to contact you first instead. George Ho ( talk) 06:30, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
This edit is copy/pasted from, eg: here. Please can you do the honours. Thanks. - Sitush ( talk) 15:35, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
No worries - Sphilbrick has just done it. - Sitush ( talk) 15:39, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
While I don't think this is a recent phenomenon, I happened to notice in the last few weeks a number of items brought to our attention as a possible copyright issue. An editor adds material which appears to match some source and then immediately removes it.
addition, followed by removal.
While it doesn't result in the addition of copyrighted material to the article, it does require some investigation in order to determine whether revdel is necessary.
If it happen once or twice, I wouldn't bother mentioning but I probably seen it a dozen times over the last couple weeks so I'm just curious whether you or any talk page stalkers know why this occurs?-- S Philbrick (Talk) 18:11, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
I think this edit might warrant a revdel. Onel5969 TT me 19:10, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I have concerns that passages of this bio are not only a bit promotional in tone and derive from COI accounts, but closely paraphrase a source. If you have a chance, could you take a look? Thank you very much, 2601, or 73.159.24.89 ( talk) 05:55, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
I have a question about the passage you recently deleted from Placebo that I thought you might be kind enough to answer. Let me preface the question by noting that my intent is not to defend the passage: in fact, the passage's author Brisawhite has only made two edits to Wikipedia to date; I reverted the first and you reverted the second (which I'm now wishing that I had done myself), so we would agree that Brisawhite has not demonstrated superb editorial judgment to date: "o-fer" as they say in baseball. I'm asking because the deleted passage raised a theoretical question in my mind that I don't know how to answer: Is it copyright violation to cite, in Wikipedia, numerical data from a study? There were three sentences in the deleted passage, none of which appeared verbatim in the cited source. The first two sentences were basically reporting statistical results: "66% of respondents felt" x, "84% of respondents felt" y, "82% of" respondents who felt y also felt z. The third sentence defined the terms used in x, y, and z. I can see that some of the phrases in x, y, and z should have been in quotation marks because they came from the cited source. But the numerical figures themselves shouldn't be changed, of course, nor would it have been wise to change the phrases in x, y, and z much, if at all, as that would have misrepresented the results of the study. So, was the solution in this case (assuming the passage was kept, which I'm not advocating) simply to add quotation marks to the phrases in x, y, and z, or should this kind of numerical data not be reported in Wikipedia at all? Again, I'm not defending the deleted passage, just interested in the theoretical question for future reference. Many thanks for your tireless work on copyvio, by the way. Biogeographist ( talk) 01:18, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
See this diff by IP as it may need redaction. Also look at contributions of IP which are problematic. He has been adding to the comments of other users, and adding (copyrighted) incorrect information to articles and I'm thinking it requires an admin's attention. Thank you in advance Atsme 📞 📧 15:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, there is a copy-vio at this page with this edit. It seems to be a direct copy of this web page. It came to light when the editor concerned came to the help desk with a ref error question. I fixed the ref and pointed out the copy-vio to the editor both at their TP and the HD, asking them to rewrite it as soon as... They have not done so and I believe they have probably seen one or other of the messages as I received a 'thanks' notification (for the edit). I have not as yet removed the offending text. Should it now be 'revdel'd'? It's a seemingly newish editor who might not understand about copy-vio. Thanks. Eagleash ( talk) 00:36, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I am genuinely sorry about the article. I really did remove and reword as much as I could and thought it was satisfactory. I haven't been creating articles for a while and have been concentrating on maintenance, so maybe I am rusty. I would to rewrite the article as I believe the subject is notable. Perhaps I can keep rewrites in my sandbox pending your review(s). Sorry, again. I know I have been editing long enough to know better and I hate being a disappointment. Thought I had sufficiently reworded it but evidently not. Yours, Quis separabit? 15:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. I've tried asking Primefac about these questions, but he seems to be away right now. I wonder could you provide any guidance? Perhaps there is a handy exposition somewhere, linked from WP:COPYVIOCITE, to which Primefac already directed me. But I can't find anything. Many thanks for any help you can give.
Martinevans123 ( talk) 15:43, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
If you have time can you please check this article? Jani Babu Qawwal. I removed a copyright violation to imdb, but I don’t know how to remove the copy vio from the article’s history. Can you help? Thanks. Donald1659 ( talk) 18:22, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
Copyvio-revdel}}
. Thanks for reporting. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 18:43, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diaane, on the Near-death experience#Cross-cultural aspects, the following blog site "Hallucinatory Near-Death Experiences: Cultural Differences" is used as a reference though there are peer-reviewed journal review articles dealing with the same topic. Do you agree there is no issue replacing it with the better sources? Your thoughts? Josezetabal ( talk) 07:10, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, why you reverted my edition in Auschwitz? The article concerns Auschwitz - something that was - and is not (exists) anymore.
So an infobox should show the old location or if it is a more favorable location, it should be noted.
Auschwitz is not today. One of the things is that the Auschwitz Museum and Museum is located in Poland, but the camp was in Germany. This infobox is about the camp, so you must have it either in the old location (Germany) or in a more current location, but the current one should be noted because infobox concerns past. We can not combine the present and the past in one template
-- Swd ( talk) 13:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
[7] Date 23 August 1942 – 2 February 1943 (5 months, 1 week and 3 days) Location Stalingrad, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union like you moving battle in the Soviet Union to Russia.
So if the infobox is about The Camp, should be location from the time of its activity. Former camp is former location, and of corse UNESCO and Museum location is in Poland. Look how we did it in the polish Wikipedia. Infobox about Camp is with former data, and about Museum with actual. Maybe should be in english "silver star" article similar. Location Former for camp, and acual for UNESCO and Museum. I hope you will be understand me better now. For my english I'm sory. ;)greetings -- Swd ( talk) 13:54, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi!
Why have you deleted Draft: David Urankar
I am David Urankar and owner of linked page: www.davidurankar.com
Best, David — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winterd1 ( talk • contribs) 13:46, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, I noticed you removed a whole lot of copyrighted information on Hoa people and I've noticed the same source has been used on multiple articles about the ethnic Chinese communities of Southeast Asia ( Chinese Filipino, Chinese Cambodian, Laotian Chinese and Thai Chinese). Just wanted to let you know so you can have a look if there's any problem with the use of that source. Thanks. ( 120.144.30.158 ( talk) 10:33, 13 February 2018 (UTC))
Hi Diannaa, you might want to take a look at this apparent copyvio re-addition of content copied-and-pasted from the Eagle Petrochem website to the Naptha article. It looks like a definite copyvio according to Earwig's copyvio detector. Thanks. Carlstak ( talk) 12:20, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, this article has long been subjected to promotional editing by a paid account, who I've asked be blocked. But I also think that they've dropped in copyright violation passages that have since been removed. There may need to be a bit of rev/deletion. Thanks for any assistance you can provide. 73.159.24.89 ( talk) 13:45, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Dianaa. Please have a look on [[Robert Jelinek (artist))] and stop the deeting process for all the pictures on that page. Volunteer Response Team Ticket here: [Ticket#: 2018021310008323]. Thanx! -- Gantenbrink ( talk) 14:10, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
OTRS pending}}
template to each file. Processing your email will likely take a while, as they have huge backlogs right now. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 15:00, 13 February 2018 (UTC)Thanx! -- Gantenbrink ( talk) 09:57, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, the DYK review here talks about copyvio and copy/paste, and the article was tagged with the copy/paste template. I was troubled by the (false) assertion that a low Earwig score meant that there wasn't a copyvio, and I imagine that at least some of the edits should be hidden, given the examples in the review. Can I leave this in your hands? Thanks again for all that you do in this space. BlueMoonset ( talk) 06:51, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa,
I have uploaded a new profile picture of Wim Naudé on his Wikipedia page. However, there seem to be some issues with the licensing part. I have adjusted now three times but keep receiving messages that still something is to be adjusted. Could you please assist? Thank you in advance, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maastricht52 ( talk • contribs) 13:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
So I was looking through Special:Contributions/Rashid.ali and was cleaning up some of the copyvios he introduced - need some revdels: of
The copyvios are generally cited to the copied from source. Thanks Galobtter ( pingó mió) 10:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa,
Thank you for your message, I will take a deep look into these information sources you gave.
The most copyrighted material would be the style definitions, because they are definition from the academics itself, you mention "direct copy or too close paraphrasing" and you are right with your statements. Moreover I understand that Wikipedia use CC BY-SA and that the copying text of copyrighted material is strict forbidden if it is not compatible with CC BY-SA.
Probably the solution would be, to make a general statement about the different kind of styles, because then it isn't own research, but also not directly copyrighted, because only some words are used from the text and every word is refereed to the author.
I will solve the translation attributions as soon as possible.
I will take a look at the licenses of these documents.
Yours Sincerely, -- Sorrow of Sophie ( talk) 15:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I am wondering if I would be able to access the deleted revision of my sandbox page. I had an article I was working on there. Thanks Jk956 ( talk) 15:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Greetings. I come to you only because I saw your recent copyright work on Libyan Civil War (2011). I came across the Edward Rubin article today, and found it horribly non-neutral and violating copyright. In particular it was taking material directly from [11] and [12]. Earwig's copyvio detector found 70.7% and 58.1% confidence on those two hits respectively. I looked into the article's history, and the first introduction of the material began with User:Solntsa, a user who hasn't edited in >4 years, in 2010. I edited the last 'clean' version of the article, adding in some citations, category fixes that had been done, and wording changes to bring the article to date with his position now. Everything from this to this, inclusive, needs to be rev del'd. Could you assist please? Thanks, -- Hammersoft ( talk)
Dear Diannaa Thank you for your email about my contribution to the article about Sacadura Cabral. I used only material that I own the copyright together with my collaborators. Of course I took it from the our publication that I put in the references. Is there any other article that you found similar? If that is the case, please send me the reference, because I own the copyright of the text I have used. Thanking you in advance, I remain, Yours sincerely, Jorge M M Barata ( talk) 17:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Diannaa: The following I posted following the information you posted on the Mount Tabor page. This is a problem, it is explained below.
@Diannaa: Since I am the one that originally wrote it, and copied by someone else and added to the site mentioned, and we are talking about a legal treaties that are on file at the Texas State Archives in Austin, there is no copyright issue and it should not be removed. There is no copyright instances on anything I have written except documents which are public from the 1840's and not subject to copyright. As a historian, genealogist, I may be lacking knowledge in Wiki, but not history. Nor as a former CFR judge would I determine any copyright of my original information. Please contact me before you start removing things. I welcome, tweeking to make it more Wiki friendly, as I have a lot to learn, but this nonsense has happened to me before about the Mount Tabor Indian Cemetery, where I put it on Wikipedia, only to have somebody say it was on another site and remove it. YES, information of mine on that site. Same on the Treaty of Birds Fort, where somebody took it off, only to have somebody else put it back up later. Suggestions is better than removal in this instance.
Terran57 (talk) 21:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Terran57Terran57 (talk) 21:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Diannaa: a second thought those treaties were OUR treaties, my tribe, my people, my family of which I am the elected Chairman. That in it's self states you have no right to remove them. You may not understand tribal sovereignty, but this is a violation of such. Also, show me ANYWHERE on the net referencing the Treaty with the Fredonian Republic!
Terran57 (talk) 21:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Terran57Terran57 (talk) 21:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Terran57 ( talk) 21:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Terran57 Terran57 ( talk) 21:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Diannaa: Thank you for revisiting this. No I didn't write it recently, in fact it was first put out there on an MTIC website in the 90's. The words are mine verbatim and were initially seen by me on Wikipedia on the Battle of Salado Creek page, but that has since been changed. I have seen them or very close renditions on a number of other websites and Wiki pages over the years. I have no problem with people using my words, but I want to use them myself! I actually got that comment from a Texas State Representative over 20 years ago, who said basically the same thing, thus I jumped on the "never abrogated by Congress" and used that in briefs dealing with our state recognition as well as our thoughts of reopening the case for the Bowles Treaty that we last lost before the Indian Claims Commission in 1953 (I wasn't born yet to be there!). My contention was and is that the reason we received an adverse outcome in 53 was that Birds Fort treaty was not included. Anyway, that's why I know that statement. Since it has been rehashed dozens of times, I don't know if the author of the Cherokee page would know where they got it. It has been on there for a while. Again, thank you for your response. I have already had to fight about this site when one gentleman listed it fr deletion as fraud. He never bothered to look, but later apologized, but I am till learning Wiki and I have had things changed and removed, that should not have been, only in one instance for somebody else recreating it. Please forgive me for being touchy about this. My knowledge of comprehending Wiki [[ ]] or {{ }} is at this point beyond me. I am attempting to adapt as fast as I can at this point. About 15 years ago when Wiki was very new, I created several pages. I have no idea of the username I had then. I started Terran57 about 10 years ago, but due to health and changes I did not keep up with, I have been left long in the dust. Working on it. Never knew anything about signatures until 2-3 days ago! Believe me I have tried repeatedly to get others to build this page. I am supposed to be writing a grant for the next fiscal year right now rather than this, but I felt it imperative for reasons too long to go into, that it had to be done now. Again, thank you for your input.
Terran57 ( talk) 22:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Terran57 Terran57 ( talk) 22:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Diannaa. I have identified a seven-year-old copyright violation in Gregor Mendel Institute and would like to request some revdels,
Thanks! Rentier ( talk) 11:17, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, Dianna for the information you provided.
But I would like to object that the photo I provided is in the public domain, as I did add a citation. The portrait is owned by the State of Tennessee on display at the state Museum, portraits owned by the state are allowed for public educational use.( http://www.tnportraits.org/811062-dury-george.htm) This same domain use is allowed for Governor, state legislator or other state owned portraits. That this portrait being part of the state collection is open to public use.( http://www.tnmuseum.org/Visitors/Photographic_Policy/) As well I have direct permission from the person who took the photo for the state.(Which I could supply in written forum.) I did crop the photo from it's original size to Better fit the page.
(As well as the other citation from the gallery I wrote that myself on Dury.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjamin.P.L ( talk • contribs) 17:50, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, Dianna for the information you provided.
The original content of the article is taken from the official website of the of Kerala and it is not a copy right web page. The site http://www.justkerala.in/kerala-govt-departments/agriculture-department has copied the content from the official website. So they have no copy right on the content (the right vested with http://www.kerala.gov.in). So I think there is no copy right problem with the content. But even if you are not satisfied with my explanation, I will try to re-write it.
Expecting your reply. Sanu N ( talk) 03:21, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa,
I very much appreciate your point of view here. Please allow me to address your points, and another point that is independent of your recent edits.
First of all, without identifying myself (I assume that's a Wiki policy?), I should say that I am NOT Daniel Zwerdling. I'm a scientist and longtime chairman of a science department at a major university. However, as someone who believes that journalism truly is the 4th branch of government, I have followed his career for a very long time. I am NOT in the news, media, etc business.
My first set of edits were triggered by my having visited Wikipedia out of curiosity to see what was there for Zwerdling, since he has recently retired. I was shocked to see that someone (several different usernames actually) have made edits that change the nature of the Wiki entries from being factual and informative. Instead of what was there previously (for instance, before December 2017 when I last looked) there was a section about allegations of sexual harassment etc. These allegations are slanderous, biased, and there has been no due process to address them. I make no assumptions in the motives of the people(s) who have made the Wiki changes to add the allegations, however these allegations are all unsubstantiated, vague, and except in one case, anonymous. In my humble opinion, these kinds of things, until proven, have no business in something like Wikipedia, and accomplish nothing other than to serve as someone's way of "punishing" something they believe needs punishment. That is not how we do things in this country.
I am therefore asking your advice as to what the right thing to do is. I'm not sure of the correct process here, and I do not want to get into an editing war, however I feel very certain about this. If you think I should contact the person who made the edits today (2/18), then I'm willing to do so. Note that the username of that person is "StopEditingYourOwn", indicating that they believe Zwerdling is doing the editing, and clearly they are trying to punish him for what in their mind they believe to be true.
Now to the edits that you made to what I had done on Feb 17. I appreciate your email describing Wikipedia’s strict rules. They seem designed to help ensure accuracy and protect copyright infringements. That’s how I interpreted the links you sent, as well as your statements about not being able to quote more than brief passages from other sources. Perhaps I should explain what happened to prompt my editing on Feb 17. What I used for my information was material that I asked Zwerdling to give me. I did this on my own initiative, and he sent me the bio that was at one point on the NPR web site, plus some recent awards mentions. I edited the material and placed it in the Wiki page.
I believe that the material prior to when the slanderous edits about sexual harassment was made was itself inaccurate and so far from being the kind of comprehensive information that Wikipedia is known for that I felt that I had to fix it. For instance, previously he was referred to as a "reserve" broadcaster, when in fact he was one of NPR’s senior on-air personalities and one of the nation’s leading investigative journalists. I know, because I’ve closely followed and admired his groundbreaking reporting at NPR for almost 40 years. He has had a career that has had about as much impact as you can have in the journalism world, winning awards, and breaking stories that had national impact and resulted in changes in policy (from food to organic farming to PTSD and traumatic brain injury). As to the details of your edits, you cut the quotes by the directors of the Alfred I. duPont awards, one of the most coveted awards in journalism, calling him a “legend” in public broadcasting. I will review the Wiki rules but wouldn't this quote be appropriate if I noted a reference?
What I propose as far as the contents of his page is for me to go to the links that you provided, read up on what Wikipedia requires, and try to come up with something that conforms. I can then send it to you before posting, just to keep from having the page bouncing around, however I would very much like for you to restore it to what it was after your edits (16:12 and 16:06 today).
Please reply, and many thanks for all of your work. Wikipedia is a national treasure (as is Zwerdling!!!!).
Visitorfromthefuture ( talk) 02:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa, Just wanted to let you know that I have cleaned up the content of the former page " Food security in Mexico" that was deleted and will be posting the content on my sandbox. Thanks, please let me know if there are any problems. Jk956 ( talk) 04:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I was the reviewer that initiated the copyright investigation of this article, and it came up on my watchlist as having been republished. Earwig gives it a clean bill of health, but I can still find what seem like copyvios of for example this site and this one by searching for certain phrases. Are you happy with the present version of the article? Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 11:59, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Some years ago I already had contact about the drawing. The reaction was: "nice picture by the way". It is done by my late wife in 2001. I am her widower and made the photograph in 2001. We lived nearby in the house Tanyfoel (Below the Hill) Romeinsekeizer ( talk) 14:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa, We greatly appreciate your help, particularly from a senior editor. Unfortunately, the last time we worked on our Midshipmans Prayer article, we could not figure out how to communicate with you in order to relate that the prayer is not copyrighted and was created by my Grandfather, Chaplain Thomas, when he was Command Chaplain at the US Naval Academy and under the employment of the Federal Government as a Navy Chaplain. We hope this resolves the issue. We did determine that the Lords Prayer and the Gettysburg address are in full text in their respective Wikipedia articles and presumably not copyrighted as is the Midshipmans Prayer. We look forward to your continued assistance as we are novices at this process. You might take look at William N. Thomas, Wikipedia article which we did as our first article which is replete with citations and credits. Our very best Richard Templeton and Sharon Hansen Eaward24 ( talk) 14:27, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
We need assistance with a change to the title of the page. We would like it to read Midshipman Prayer. We have been unsuccessful in our attempts. Can you please assist? Richard and Sharon Eaward24 ( talk) 16:31, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I've removed some copyright violation--article has a promotional history. Could you rev/delete where appropriate, and check for further violations? At your convenience, of course. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 15:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
Problems
{{sfn}}
are not visible in the references list whilst editing.
[18]
[19]Changes later this week
Meetings
Future changes
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
22:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, Thank you so much for your help and suggstions. I was working to update the content in a correct format and valid contents with references. Please, coulld you check if aaverything is according to the Wikipedia Law in order to publish the page correctly? Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BudapestValladolid ( talk • contribs) 18:13, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Is there a way to verify if a source is in public domain? For example, how should we check if https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/press-release-archive-1995/pr112895.html is in public domain? I mean, other than ".mil are usually in public domain". Is there any easy way to spot a declaration on these sites stating "we are releasing this information in public domain, no need to get your lazy butts in a twist, you can simply copy and paste this stuff wherever you want"? Kindly ping when replying. Also pinging Megalibrarygirl as she is literally a librarian, and also, familiar with PD works. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:34, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
PD-notice}}
or {{
CC-notice}}
or manually like this (for example): "
Unless a copyright is indicated, information on the Central Intelligence Agency Web site is in the public domain and may be reproduced, published or otherwise used without the Central Intelligence Agency's permission.Which is really relieving, cuz who'd want to contact CIA, eh? —usernamekiran (talk) 21:28, 20 February 2018 (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
M.chohan (
talk •
contribs)
Hi! I`m just back from vacations and I see my content about Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin was removed due to some copyright problems, BUT I work at this University (my University has all the copyright for this texts) and it was my task to update this article. What can we do with this? Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NataliaDer ( talk • contribs) 08:40, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
I cannot find the text you are objecting to for copyright reasons. How do I see it? deisenbe ( talk) 14:58, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Ok... did some revising... please let me know if this is enough to make it no longer a copyright vio. Blueboar ( talk) 00:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC) Blueboar ( talk) 00:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Did some revising... let me know if I need to do more. Blueboar ( talk) 00:50, 22 February 2018 (UTC) Blueboar ( talk) 00:50, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I don’t believe this is a copyright violation. The information I used comes directly from MY national association’s advocacy page. These documents were designed by the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists. The association allows its members, which I am one, to use these advocacy documents however we choose without concern of copyright violations. Bottom line, using the content of these publications is exactly what they were designed for. They are even referenced. Will you kindly restore the additions made to these pages?
Also, why did you remove the “also known as nurse anesthesiologist?” These changes were made by a board certified CRNA and member of the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists. Who better to authenticate legitimacy of the information?
The information on the OANA webpage, which is a state association affiliated with the national association, is the identical document produced by the AANA; a document that the AANA not only authorizes but encourages it’s members to use. We have full rights and discretion to use this information.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiftytoone ( talk • contribs)
Dear Diannaa Thank you for your notification on African Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science Research draft copy. I am a staff of http://academicjournals.org/. You can verify from the email address I used in opening an account on Wikipedia. Academic Journals is going forward and wants all her journals and the company to have a page on Wikipedia. I will be glad if the content is not removed because i intended placing the other journals draft copies for review. Thank you for your time and consideration.--Samson at AcademicJournals 13:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samson at AcademicJournals ( talk • contribs)
I noticed this website has copied many of Wikipedias articles Investoa ( talk) 15:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, can you have a look at this promotional article? I suspect there's a lot more copyright violation content than I found so far. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 15:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Although St Edmund's School Canterbury may need a little rev/deletion again for persistent copyvio. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 16:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Hey, Diannaa. Would you mind taking a look at Ken Selzer, specifically the most recent additions? The following pictures may be eligible for deletion as well: File:KenHeadshot.jpg and File:Ken Deb Farm 2.jpg. Thanks, Corky 17:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
You may wish to revoke talk page access.-- Cahk ( talk) 08:21, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, You removed my content from this page. I am the author of both articles, wikipedia and Asylum Projects (my name is idetical with Asylum Projects), which are fundamentally different and composed for different purposes. Asylum Projects is interested in the the physical apparatus of the campus, not its broader social context. For that reason the content I created is different as it has a different audience. Moreover, a simply cut and paste job would not require so many edits as documented in the page history, nor would there be any public utility to such an article.
In terms of the question of intellectual property, I released this information to Asylum Project as part of a deal through NSH Historical Society. They do not possess the copyright to my work, nor is that work identical to what I provided them with.
In short, I have no idea why you removed my work. I understand that the article needs to be better tailored to the purpose I outlined above, but it is a work in progress. Please restore this page to its amended form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerbiePocket ( talk • contribs) 18:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
I can see that you're more knowledgeable about this process, but it does seem deeply circuitous, as I would also need to get both Asylum Project and NSH-Historical Society involved as well... and they are not speedy with such inquiries. Particularly as the latter meets only twice a year. Wouldn't it be more advantageous to remove the content you believe is in violation of site policy, rather then simply throwing everything out? Much of the content you removed had nothing to do with Asylum Project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerbiePocket ( talk • contribs) 18:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Diana, that is simply not true, and it is documentable that it is not true. There's no reason to be obtuse. I will take this to higher site official if needs be. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerbiePocket ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention Robert, but that is not the nature of my dispute. My grip is this- yes, some material was taken from Asylum Project, but it rested in the minority. I understand that you have concerns with copywright. That much is clear. However, it was not the Asylum Project material that was removed. Everything was removed, which is not a matter of site policy, nor of intellectual property, and that it is what I am asking to have restored. You will see quite clearly in comparing the two documents that this Wikipedia article has several sections that have no parallel to Asylum Project (ie. List of Superintendents, Popular Culture, Modern Hospital). I am NOT disputing the site policy on copyright.
I have already contacted Asylum Projects and personally removed my content from there site until this issue is resolved.
Hi Diannaa, this needs you rev/deletion magic again. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 02:34, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't even think of geolocating the IP. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 20:09, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello. Could you please take a look at this edit on Saadat Hasan Manto? Copied verbatim from the source by the looks of it, by an editor with a troubled past here (blocked four times so far, for edit-warring, disruptive editing and POV-pushing...), who now seems to have branched into making copyvios too. Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W talk 21:20, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Blog used as reference Hello Diaane, on the Near-death experience#Cross-cultural aspects, the following blog site "Hallucinatory Near-Death Experiences: Cultural Differences" is used as a reference though there are peer-reviewed journal review articles dealing with the same topic. Do you agree there is no issue replacing it with the better sources? Your thoughts? Josezetabal (talk) 07:10, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
The place to ask this kind of question is the reliable sources noticeboard. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:37, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank-you Diannaa, very kind of you - best Josezetabal ( talk) 06:00, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
I understand your concerns regarding COI. However, that is a guideline and it shouldn’t be enforced when the information is irrefutable and cited. I only added facts from information that is readily available to the public and has no copyright infringements. Nothing I added is controversial or inaccurate and can be found with a simple search which makes it common knowledge.
The fact is, the Nurse Anesthetist page is inaccurate and out of date. How is one supposed to go about updating it? Who has that privilege? Isn’t it the goal of Wiki to have its pages up to date and accurate for the edification of its readers? Fiftytoone ( talk) 11:03, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
this edit summary needs revdeling as copyvio of [21]. Thanks Galobtter ( pingó mió) 17:00, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Dianaa. I already made The Secret Musical Life of Pets as a hoax and I don't want the film to exist on Wikipedia, because it is not a place to collect made-up stuff. Joeymiskulin ( talk) 20:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diana, Thank you for pointing out my mistakes and making me understand Wikipedia in a better way. I tried to use the sources from a verified source, newspaper articles in my last edit. I still don't understand where it went wrong. I will take care of the points that you have mentioned in my last edit and try not to make those mistakes again in future. Mahi Jaiswal ( talk) 10:40, 27 February 2018
Hi, Diannaa. I don't think we've ever interacted, but I've seen posts you made to user talk pages patiently explaining copyvio policies so I thought you would be the right person to come to. Could I ask you to look at the Long-term Prospects section of the Catalan independence movement article, which was recently added by User:rolf h nelson? It is eight sentences long with six refs. So far, so good. But the wording of each of the eight sentences contains a copy and paste, or a close paraphrase, of a sentence in the respective source. I don't know if the editor could validly claim that each sentence only took a small number of words from each source, so it's not violating copyright. My gut feeling is that it is copyvio, but I'd rather have the word of somebody that knows the policy. Of course, I could just re-write the section, if I thought it was worth keeping, but I'm not at all sure it's needed. It has already been removed twice by another editor, and replaced both times. My other concern would be that the user might be doing the same thing on other articles – he is quite a prolific editor. Regards, Scolaire ( talk) 09:55, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
—but is this OK for us? Hope you're well—sorry to bother you there. ...SerialNumber 54129 ...speculates 14:27, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
![]() | 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 50 | ← | Archive 54 | Archive 55 | Archive 56 | Archive 57 | Archive 58 | → | Archive 60 |
The article I am working on now shows all green and less than 25% confidence, though Earwig's tool still marks things like "People's Republic of China", "Annapurna Conservation Area Project (ACAP)" or "Caragana gerardiana and Lonicera spinosa" in pink. How bad is that? Aditya( talk • contribs) 08:32, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
In the edit filter, there is this guy who keeps attempting to create apam usernames and is filling up the filter logs. Anything that you can do? 2602:306:3357:BA0:3476:9B74:A8E2:994E ( talk) 16:53, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello. I am working on getting permission for one the files you flagged, File:Cropped portrait of Zoe Strimpel.jpg. I asked Ms. Strimpel to send a clearance email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. The other file, File:Portrait of Zoe Strimpel.jpg can be deleted. Rgonsalv ( talk) 23:23, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
OK, Ms. Strimpel sent a clearance email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. I added the {{ OTRS pending}} tag to the file description page. Rgonsalv ( talk) 04:27, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
OK, thanks for tracking this down. Note that in her email, she released the photo under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported and GNU Free Documentation License. Please update the Licensing on the file description page. Rgonsalv ( talk) 12:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
I saw that you looked at User:Walter=svobodadiaries/Alexander Richard Svoboda. Maybe my post at WP:Copyright problems on 22 Nov wasn't sufficiently clear, but there are additional files in the same state:
i.e. copied from the Svobodapedia site without a clear license at that site that allows copying. — jmcgnh (talk) (contribs) 13:35, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Military history reviewers' award | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons for reviewing a Milhist article at PR, GAN, ACR or FAC during the period October to December 2017. Thank you for supporting Wikipedia's quality content processes.
Peacemaker67 (
click to talk to me) 04:58, 3 January 2018 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
I don't remember doing this, but thanks! — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 19:42, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
I noticed several edits (02:47, October 29, 2017 — 07:01, October 29, 2017) were (Redacted) in the article Head transplant. As you are the last editor of of that time period with sysop privileges, I assume it is you who did that. If not please correct me. Why were these actions taken? I am curious. Thank you. Nikolaiho ☎️ 📖 03:10, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa, Happy New Year. Every time I come I see this beautiful template. Reminds me of a similar one, the Type 3 template for wordpress at the turn of the century, that I used to blog on. The above article is 98.5% copyvio. Highest I have ever seen. I thought it might be attempt to migrate the website to Wikipedia. I have sent an email to the website owner, to see if that is what is happening. I can't see it, it looks brand new, and indeed is new, 2015-16 scope_creep ( talk) 21:29, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
The edit was copied from Boomerang's page (the horse he rode) all accomplishments the horse achieve were achieved with Eddie as the rider. Therefore I do not see an issue as both Eddie (the rider) and Boomerang (the horse) achieved the same awards. Boomerang's wiki page is much more detailed than Eddie's and I thought it was only fair the Eddie share the same detailed accomplishments. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.52.95.130 ( talk) 22:52, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
Do you think "Michellevford" and "Michwit" are the same person, or at least meatpuppets? They each posted the exact same passage. 331dot ( talk) 22:57, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
CopyVio, CopyVio, Probable. Check their contributions, I think there are more. - Mar11 ( talk) 04:46, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
thank you for your help!
Sardinhapao (
talk) 12:16, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
92.29.159.166 appears to be another IP sock. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 15:23, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
I saw your concerns regarding copyright infringement on the page Dean Winslow. I have obtained permission in the form of an email from Stanford (I'm not sure where to include it in the article). Quite frankly, I don't understand how they could even own the copyright to this information simply because it is listed on their website. It is factual information and appears in several locations on the internet. Please help me wrap my head around the idea that an entity besides Dean Winslow himself could claim the copyrights to a description of his career.
Samwinslow ( talk) 20:28, 5 January 2018 (UTC)
Some of the content you included in Pascal-p2 has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:38, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
The "history" section that you deleted was written by me. I don't see how I can proceed to write this article if you DELETE the material I write for that. Of course it is not copyrighted. I have no intention of copyrighting what I write here.
Never mind. I give up. Writing for wikipedia is too much of a pain in the rear.
Feel free to delete the article. I am not going to write for wikipedia again.
PS. The reason you decided this was copyrighted was because it was similar to what was found on a web site. IF YOU HAD ACTUALLY LOOKED AT IT, instead of just seeing your search matched, you would have seen:
1. That is was MY WEB SITE!!! so of course the content was similar. I WROTE IT!!! 2. That there was NO COPYRIGHT NOTICE ON IT, OR INDEED ANYWHERE ON THE WEB SITE. 3. That in fact that web site specificially says "ALL MATERIAL HERE IS PUBLIC DOMAIN".
So now wikipedia is mainly concerned with not getting sued over copyright. Not with actual content, just your legal rear end. Congradulations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samiam95124 ( talk • contribs) 02:10, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa! Thank you for editing my draft article draft:Mark Wexler. This is my first time submitting so I appreciate your help! I am trying to make the changes you suggested but I'm not sure what specifically needs work. I read the help pages on quotations, copyright, etc. In the draft, I used quotes and footnoted sources in the reference section. Was the quote too long? Did I footnote things incorrectly? I'm sorry to ask such newbie questions but I don't even know where to start. If you could point me in the right direction so I can make the article better I would really appreciate it. Thanks! AskMK ( talk) 19:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for contacting me on that edit.
Sadly I can't seem to find a way to see what exactly was removed so I can't understand the reasons. In the history tab my edit date has a strikethrough and the usual diff buttons are disabled.
There's a huge amount of misuse of that word, "viral". Huge. Everyone seems to think that if a video or article or other media item has a lot of views, then it's a viral story. That is categorically wrong. My intention is to try to convey that information in its rightful place. Please let me know how can this be worked out. (PS: why did you ask to talk here and not in my talk page where you created the OP?) -- Nmaxcom ( talk) 12:14, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa... I thank you so much for showing me the steps to using copyright here on Wikipedia. Also, thank you for showing me how to follow and understand the practices used for contributions. I did not ask for permission before adding the info to the article, but I have an issue asking for permission, because sometimes it takes a while for the copyright holder to answer my questions I may have or an email I may send to them. I do not have any questions, but I will read all that you wrote on my talk page. I felt silly removing what you wrote from my talk page, but I can still view them, even though I removed them from my talk page. I want to be a better editor on here, and I certainly want to expand articles classified as stubs on here. I will continue to leave messages on your talk page if I do happen to have any questions, and I appreciate you giving me the permission to do so. Also, I hope you are having a great new year, and that you and your family had a wonderful Christmas. Just to let you know, my username is pronounced "callman" not "Coleman." Thanks! Colman2000 ( talk) 16:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, thanks for your attention.
I'm working on the draft article for the late musician Doug Lunn. On December 12 you said, "Material you included in the above draft appears to have been copied from the copyright web page http://www.fretlessbass.com/lunn-doug. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake."
I am in contact with Fretless Bass website founder Eric Larson by email and phone. He has given me permission to quote from his interview with Doug. Please let me know what proof of permission is required by Wikipedia. I've searched but can't seem to find info on this issue. Does Eric need to submit an email or complete a form to verify his permission to quote from the interview?
Please point me to related articles or advise me on the best way to proceed. Thanks.
Art101 ( talk) 21:20, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello! You rejected the article FxPro based on the arguments from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FxPro. However, the article was different from the remote version and was revised in accordance with Wikipedia rules. How can I resume the discussion on the article? -- Darislaw ( talk) 22:51, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
...on this? Beyond My Ken ( talk) 07:56, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
ANSWER: No the Material was not copied from another web site. To the contrary, AFTER I edited the Wikipedia page, someoneelse copied the Wikipedia page and pasted into his or her own web page. Someone copied Wikipedia content and used in their own page. The edit is 100% original from me. People copies Wikipedia and post them in other pages. That is what this person did Aroniel2 ( talk) 13:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Just so you know User:Navid.amirpour restored probably the same COPYVIO from the same source 3 hours after you rev del'd and issued a warning [2]. I've requested revdel again, but there also seems to be a COI issue on the page, and since you already issued an admin warning I thought I should let you know. SeraphWiki ( talk) 02:17, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your message regarding an edit I made on the above mentioned article. I've made some changes (really just added two sentences)and would appreciate your consideration.-- DanJazzy ( talk) 13:36, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, I just pulled out the Plot and Character sections from this article, which appear to have been copied directly from the publicity blurbs for the 2017 movie made out of the (1992) novel. They appear to have been there pretty much from the beginning of the article. I'll let you decide whether any iterations need to be hidden. Thanks as always for your help. BlueMoonset ( talk) 17:58, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
I don't think that this was clear-cut copyright violation necessitating RevisionDelete. I find RevDel frustrating in this case because it takes a lot of time to figure out what changes were made. The material in this case is substantially similar to the info in the company (Galapagos NV)'s annual report ( https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1421876/000119312517093838/d333278d20f.htm). Arguably, much of the information in the annual report falls under fair use because it is a regulatory filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. And it does not seem to be a creative work. By overusing RevDel, you are foiling wikipedia editors without being constructive. There is a more constructive way of handling this situation, e.g. by quoting the material in question. (I apologize for being frustrated.) Glennchan ( talk) 20:03, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
Blatant copyright violations that can be redacted without removing attribution to non-infringing contributors... Best practices for copyrighted text removal can be found at WP:Copyright problems and should take precedence over this criterion.The part you're quoting is a follow-up sentence from the previous regarding
"ordinary" offensive comments. Copyright can and shall be removed and revdel'd when it is found. Primefac ( talk) 20:42, 9 January 2018 (UTC) ( talk page stalker)
Hi,
User:Wanderlust2003/sandbox appears to have been copied from https://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-is-jupiter-58.html. As a US government agency, that's public domain, am I right? If so, does it still need attribution? Thanks. Adam9007 ( talk) 00:31, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
The information I had for Benny Ramos came from the Spanish Wikipedia site which KingJamesBand.com copy and pasted on to their own site. I was unaware Spanish Wikipedia was copyrighted so my mistake. JJsCat ( talk) 15:22, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Good morning, Diannaa. I saw your removal of my addition to the SH-AWD page due to copyright. Sorry about that, I didn't realize press releases were copyright-protected (but I see that after a quick search).
Question for you: This site: http://hondanews.com/channels/tlx-press-kit/releases/2015-acura-tlx-powertrain has the same information. Undoubtedly they got that information from the source I'd originally cited. That hondanews.com has been used as the citation for all other models. So I guess I'm confused, as it appears hondanews.com is just mirroring the acura.com press releases. Wouldn't that make all those citations examples of infringement? Or can I re-post with the new link without danger of being labeled a "persistent violator"? Ziwcam ( talk) 16:25, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. Please tell me where my article is that I worked on last night till midnight, eyes watering, head spinning. I want to see what I wrote that you say copyright violations exist. I did not copy from website meanmary.com/bio. This info is all over the place. I even have Mean Mary's permission to use whatever I need. She sent me a Word doc that I have been pulling info from.
Can you bring back that article so I can continue with my editing. I will try to paraphrase more. How can I show you I have permission?
Thank you. KarenPolka ( talk) 19:22, 11 January 2018 (UTC)Karen
Is this version better to your liking? Didn't realize a cited to biography was copyrighted lol. If you see something you think is problematic, a more measured approach would be trying fix it or ask someone to fix it. Instead of taking a carte blanche approach. We're here to contribute and improve. Not sure deleting an Associate Justice of the South Dakota Supreme Court is expanding our human knowledge or in conjunction of the philosophy of Wikipedia. I'd be happy for you to prove me otherwise.
Koncurrentkat ( talk) 01:03, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Right, but thats why I cited to it?Its biographical information. Reorganized even? Why didn't you try fixing it? Often, people who propose everything for deletion, have no solution. I'm not sure what you achieved here. And can I see your legal citations please? And the current version not be ok? That information currently just reorganized from the source. You should propose the current article for deletion under that reasoning. Koncurrentkat ( talk) 04:13, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Koncurrentkat ( talk) 13:42, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Applicable law: SDCL 2-16-8 with reference to 2-16-6. I didn't know edicts of South Dakota state government were copyrighted? I recall you saying This page appears to be a direct copy from https://news.sd.gov/newsitem.aspx?id=22435. It wasn't a direct copy, however, as I was asking earlier from you, it is not copyrighted. Have a measured response of researching then correcting, instead of this carte blanche deletion method and then telling people when they don't belong here. Here, take a look at this page I created: United States Attorney for the District of South Dakota. Tell me what I did wrong instead of carte blanche deleting it. Koncurrentkat ( talk) 15:52, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Re: Kundalini
Hi - I am perplexed about your deletion of my quote from Bulhman's book. Was it the referenced quote that was copyright material? Or are you saying that I plagiarized the Editor's description of Buhlman's history which is on Amazon? If that is the case, I will redo the lead-in sentense by using statement below which is taken from a review I wrote about Buhlman's book that is published in The Journal of the Academy For Spiritual and Consciousness Studies Vol 38, Number 2 November, 2015. . . And then I will include the Quote from his book "The Secret of The Soul" referencing the page.
"The book is structured around the results of a ten-year OBE survey, made available in an earlier book and on his website. It has generated 18,000 responses demonstrating the OBE is common and cross-cultural After four decades of personal experience and research he views self-initiated OBE’s as the most powerful method available to accelerate evolution and spiritual enlightenment. He asserts that OBE’s, NDE’s, Transcendental States, Kundalini and Alien Contact are results of a natural ongoing expansion and evolution of consciousness."
I am clarifying because there are so many editors on Wikipedia who invalidate any mention of "Out of Body" Travel and consider it a "Fringe Material" and delete it as such. Thank you so much for saving me and Wikipedia from any chance of copyright infringement Cybersister27 ( talk) 15:43, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello and a belated welcome to 2018 from me. We've got a problem at Padmashali which appears to go right back to its creation in 2007. I've just posted a note at Talk:Padmashali#Copyright but have no idea how we can deal with this given the number of mirrors. Any ideas? - Sitush ( talk) 22:07, 12 January 2018 (UTC)
I made some edits to the page regarding downloadable content. I originally made it years ago but they were eventually edited. It was incomplete and said "the following content" but there was no content listed. I reworked it but please next time don't remove the edits and close all old edits, just the "wrong" parts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.15.165.111 ( talk) 12:47, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Well, you or someone else locked the older edits from view, so i can't find them anymore. It was the one made on 24 June 2015, anyway. Now i simply added some generic info and used your link as a source for some of the things that were listed in that page. Again, it's better than nothing, as the original edit said "the following blahblahblah" but there was nothing after that because it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.15.165.111 ( talk) 21:55, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. I have a quick question for you about use of text licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0 on Wikipedia. I've just discovered Principles for Digital Development, which makes use of text from https://digitalprinciples.org/, which is marked as CC BY-SA 4.0. I was about to add the correct attribution to the article, but then paused because I wasn't sure this was compatible with CC BY-SA 3.0 and the GFDL. Do you happen to know? Cordless Larry ( talk) 14:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Hey there. I stumbled across Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Lucas, which was sent to AfD as a copyvio concern (it being the wrong place technically im not worried about), but the thing is I honestly can't tell if it's a copyvio or a backwards copyvio, so I'm not sure if I should scrap and try and rewrite the article anyway (it's in piss-poor shape regardless of the copyvio, in my opinion). Thoughts on this one? The more I go down the archive rabbit hole the more questions I have. Wizardman 16:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I wanted to tell you that after one of your edits of the article for Material handling ended up making the beginning paragraph get all messed up, and I'm not a talented enough editor to fix it lol.
Jordanmiller335 ( talk) 01:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
The deleted article was about a TV series that aired in 2017, while the alleged duplicate King Naresuan (film) is about a hexalogy of films that were released between 2007 and 2015. Please restore. -- Paul_012 ( talk) 03:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, thanks for spotting the copyright issue on Principles for Digital Development (CC BY-SA 3.0 on wikipedia vs. CC BY-SA 4.0 on the Principles site). I tried to move the page back into my user space. This left a redirect behind from article space to user space (which I failed to spot) and the page was promptly deleted by User:RHaworth. I have contacted User:RHaworth about restoring the page to my user space, but so far this hasn't happened. To me it looks like that your reason (copyright) and User:RHaworth's reason (redirect) were different, and that the article could be improved by editing, particularly given that I had added independent work to the article, that was free of copyright restrictions ("If editing can improve the page, this should be done rather than deleting the page.", Wikipedia:Deletion_policy).
Regarding the copyright issue: I have informal endorsement/permission for posting to Wikipedia already, via a public forum post on the Principles site.
In any case, I have followed this up with a more formal request to get permission using the Wikipedia process. I would suggest that (a) I re-edit the page, and (b) place {{ OTRS pending}} onto the page, while the permissions are being being processed?
What do you think? Bjohas ( talk) 11:00, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
(Also see, User talk:RHaworth.)
C.f. also Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#G12._Unambiguous_copyright_infringement
This applies to text pages that contain copyrighted material with no credible assertion of public domain, fair use, or a compatible free license, where there is no non-infringing content on the page worth saving. Only if the history is unsalvageably corrupted should it be deleted in its entirety; earlier versions without infringement should be retained. For equivocal cases that do not meet speedy deletion criteria (such as where there is a dubious assertion of permission, where free-content edits overlie the infringement, or where there is only partial infringement or close paraphrasing), the article or the appropriate section should be blanked with {{ subst: Copyvio}}, and the page should be listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems.
On the basis of this ("a dubious assertion of permission", i.e. permission with the Digital Principles forum, rather than formally by email to WMF; also "free-content edits overlie the infringement" for the additional section created), I'd like to make the case for restoring the page the article space, and removing the speedy deletion nomination, while taking the above actions (as in (a)/(b) above, with {{ OTRS pending}} as a reasonable way forward). What do you think? Bjohas ( talk) 11:46, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I am not too familiar with copyright law but are lyrics to songs copyrighted or just the song themselves (the melody, lyrics, etc as a whole). There are plenty of sites online that will list lyrics for many songs, why can't wikipedia? EvilxFish ( talk) 11:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I saw you did some cleanup at Draft:Smart pill ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs). I took a look at it, and am wondering if it should just be deleted entirely?
The first section for "World’s First Electronic Smart Pill Approval" is a simple copy/paste of the firat two paragraphs from the press release. [3] the first sentence of the section "Should you use Smart Pills?" is a minor tweak to a well known quote by Myles Munroe. [4]
I honestly stopped reviewing at that point. Your thoughts? Should the draft be kept as potentially salvageable, or cut losses with view that a full rewrite from scratch is best? --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 15:12, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
While new page reviewing, I have come across an article Chat Garcia Ramilo which has some material copied and pasted from a website that states "Unless otherwise stated, content on the APC website is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0". Is this compatible with Wikipedia? Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 19:33, 14 January 2018 (UTC)
I saw you did some editing work by simply deleting entire passages and its references. I could have rephrase it as requested, but I don't have any chance to do it now (review the material) since you have deleted it permanently. Would it be possible now to ask you to share the full text (before your revision)? So I can correct it? Diannaa You have deleted about 3365 words. I think it is rough and it would be better to live you comment instead to adjust my not sufficient paraphrasing or request other people to do it [5] SeaAisina ( talk) 01:16, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for removing copyrighted material from Rajiv Shah (I can't show the true Diff because you eradicated the two preceding revisions), but you missed an even greater problem there, which is that most of the material related to Raj Shah rather than Rajiv Shah and didn't belong in this article at all. — Anomalocaris ( talk) 08:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, you have left me a message regarding copyright in my edit of Lucille Tenazas. I did not copy anything from the site you mention. Can you please be more specific. The only similarities I find are in elements like her titles Associate Dean and Henry Wolf Professor in the School of Art, Media and Technology (AMT) at Parsons The New School for Design in New York, which is not something anyone can claim copyright for, or her list of clients, ditto.-- Megustalastrufas ( talk) 15:41, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Dianna. I wonder if you could offer some advice? Would you hazard a guess as to who might hold the copyright for this image? (I often think of Wikipedia when I see this image, for some reason). More generally, of course, my question relates to works of art reproduced on items of clothing or domestic ware, e.g a Mona Lisa kitchen apron. Many thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:33, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
Apologies for not adding the CE attribution. Was about to, but I noticed it already had a link to the Wikisource article, which I supposed indicated it was PD; and at the time, it seemed like over-kill. Mannanan51 ( talk) 21:59, 15 January 2018 (UTC)
If you are going to place a copyvio tag on an article then I'd appreciate it if you would do a thorough check on it first. When I create an article this is one of the things I always do & in this case the Earwig's Copyvio Detector report states 7.4% Violation Unlikely for the ABC article/reference. There are only three examples of identical phrases of five or more words - one of which is clearly the a generic title, the Australian Comics Hall of Fame, which is used in multiple references - the other two are easy and minor fixes. I don't appreciate shoddy work and the placement of a warning which is clearly not warranted. Dan arndt ( talk) 01:47, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Dianna. Thanks for editing this page to address your concerns. Just to be sure I understand the status - with these changes, it is now clear to continue in the review process? Thanks. trix70 Trix70 ( talk) 02:01, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Please take a look here where what looks like an entire song lyric was randomly copy-pasted. Reverted by ClueBot, but probably copyright, so RevDel?— Odysseus 147 9 03:11, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
I thought the changes had been modified sufficiently not to infringe copyright. I will review and adapt further. I work for ISBT clinical transfusion working group so do want to enter some of information albeit it modified. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TransfusionDoctor ( talk • contribs) 13:06, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
I am not paid by ISBT nor are they my employer. We are a group of people who are trying to promote better transfusion practice. One way of doing this is by providing free information on wikipedia and highlighting additional places where people can source free information. I actually work for the NHS, our aim is to provide unbiased information that is not influenced by any particular country TransfusionDoctor ( talk) 13:15, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
How can I explicitly provide permission for material that ISBT has agreed can be used on wikipedia and is publically accessible on the ISBT page? TransfusionDoctor ( talk) 13:37, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, This is LaShonda Katrice Barnett and I just want to thank you for sending along the email with all the information on proper protocol for making page edits. I initially logged on last month because there was erroneous data on my page, degrees listed were wrong and other things. I'm pleased with how the page looks now. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.148.48.25 ( talk) 15:33, 16 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa......My local cable TV provider (Optimum) recently added the Olympic Channel to its channel lineup at channel 225. Over the course of the several months leading up to the US skating Nationals, my wife and I were able to watch on this cable TV channel the current international ice skating competitions as well as past Olympic competitions. The Olympic Channel's content is similar to, and I occasionally see programming interchanged with, the NBC Sports Channel. The NBC Sports Channel is designed to compete directly with ESPN and is of similar programming quality as ESPN. My observation is that the Olympic Channel offers high quality, commentated, quality edited, programming - nearly on par with the ESPN channel. Given the quality of the Olympic Channel programming, I thought it worthwhile to mention the Channel's market penetration, thereby giving people something to use to prod their local cable providers. On 13 January 2018, you replaced my footnote referenced disclosure of this cable channel with the non-referenced statement: "In 2017, NBCUniversal launched a linear version of the Olympic Channel over-the-top internet television service in cooperation with the USOC." May I ask the basis for your use of the words "linear version" (as opposed to well edited and inter-spaced}, "over-the-top" (as opposed to commentated and analyzed), and "Internet television" (as opposed to cable television) as the words appear to be misstatements of the facts? If you are ever in the New York City area, I'd like to invite over to my home to experience for yourself the US cable television Olympic Channel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Attorney18 ( talk • contribs) 05:28, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Dianna. We have a difficult case at Meena Kumari ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Aside from large-scale copyvios, there is edit-warring by one of the regulars restoring the copyvios. Best regards. Dr. K. 05:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. I marked revisions of Walter Willison for deletion on copyvio grounds, and subsequently realised that the violation dates back to the very first revision of the page (Earwig didn't initially pick this up, for some reason). I'm just flagging this up in case you feel that it is necessary to delete the whole thing. Cordless Larry ( talk) 08:36, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, the copyright holder have submitted the certificates of the two pictures File:Shinji Okazaki BFA 2016.jpg. and File:Elkeson BFA 2013.jpg regarding copyrights to wiki permission email. I am waiting for the reply. Hopefully there will not be problems with the two pictures and they can be retained. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ujishadow ( talk • contribs) 09:53, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
{{
OTRS pending}}
tags. Getting the emails cleared will likely take quite a while, as they have a huge backlog right now. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 12:57, 17 January 2018 (UTC)Hello D. In doing some maintenance work I came across this article Kakha Bendukidze and this section of another article Free University of Tbilisi#Kakha_Bendukidze. There seems to have been some cut/paste editing involved. Unfortunately I can't find where it happened so I don't know whether any "attribution" edits are needed or not. My apologies for not being more thorough in this but I thought you should take a look when you have time - just in case. Best regards. MarnetteD| Talk 17:51, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
I found a draft in the user space of User:XYGyn that never made its way to being an article. The last edit this user contributed was in 2013. Can I give this editor attribution when the draft is completed and transferred to mainspace? Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 21:56, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi - Please can you tell me why you deleted the info for 2016 review? You kept 2011 which was there previously but removed the 2016 which I added to update the information already there? (I understand your removal of the quote which was there before - thought I removed that as opinion so thanks!) Thanks Hellinadustcart ( talk) 23:52, 17 January 2018 (UTC)
Sorry - don't really get this - the information from the 2011 review is in there from the review I just put in the information from 2016? Have updated in same way hope that's okay now? Results from ombudsmen should be available on Wikipedia? Thanks Hellinadustcart ( talk) 11:52, 18 January 2018 (UTC) Oh oh finally penny dropped d'oh!
There is currently a large copyright violation at Dean Winslow. See these diffs. This same copyright violation has been added several times before, and you revision deleted it in the past, so I'm contacting you now to request that you do so again. Thanks! Marquardtika ( talk) 04:29, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I've e-mailed you about a BLP violation that probably needs revdel; sorry to add to your workload. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 05:44, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. I haven't pestered you in awhile, so I figured it's about time to do so again. Someone just added a big chunk of unsourced content to D. K. Shivakumar. I'd post a diff, but I don't want to create any more cleanup if my hunch is right. Anyway, I just scanned through it brielfy and it has the feel of a copy-and-paste type of copyvio of stuff taken from an external website. Is there a way to check something like this? As least to be sure before I start going in and creating more diffs which might need revdeleting. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 10:54, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. There appears to be considerable overlap between the Wikipedia article and the source. Although the source is noted as being in the Public Domain, surely verbatim duplication is not permitted, or is it? Thanks. Woodlot ( talk) 15:49, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello - I see that you reviewed the draft page for Kevin Nagle but I am not sure what that means for the status of the page as it says it is still pending review? I am being asked for an update so am hoping to be able to provide a status, but I cannot tell from what the page says. Thank you - Erin ErinD22 ( talk) 20:04, 18 January 2018 (UTC)
I maintain the AFC decline comments page, and I didn't know that we have a switch for cv declines. Neato. I'll be sure to pass this along to the troops. Primefac ( talk) 16:03, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
I asked for permission after you reverted my edit and this is the response I got:
You are free to use the content from our History of Parole in Canada page, at no cost, as long as the Parole Board of Canada is listed as the source.
Thank you.
Best regards, Iulia Pescarus Popa Correspondence Unit Parole Board of Canada
Is this good enough?
Whitebro (
talk)
Whitebro (
talk) 19:31, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, the article has problems with promotional tone, but I suspect there may be copyright issues as well. When you have the chance.....Thank you very much, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 20:56, 19 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, revdel needed for this edit if you could please do the honours? Copy/paste from here. Thanks. - Sitush ( talk) 13:03, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Yuwa-india Sorry, too terse: 'original prose should not be prepared'. Why did you drop the programs own vision statement (quote)? I restored the quote, added the term 'vision statement' and tweaked the order to be more historic.
It's a start. Hopefully someone will beef it up later.
BTW: The Edge feature article is mostly self-serving, although any publicity is good. The lead pic Edge used for the article is a stock photo, completely unrepresentative of the facilities at Yuwa, but that's another story...
I'm not a wiki frequent flyer these days. It may be awhile until it get back to this 19:57, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Nokia N91 - Removal copyright
Hi. Thanks for removing the copyright part. The info was written by a mobile industry veteran named Eldar Murtazin which I used and cited. The technical specs of Hard drive are available on the web just like other specs of the phone. Not sure why that was removed as well.
If I write the entire thing in my own words and cite it properly would that be okay? The reason I ask because all the other info that's written was done the same way by others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahully2j ( talk • contribs) 04:54, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa I am the Historian for the Hamilton Police Service. The information posted in Canadian Correctional Workers belong to us and I have the authority to release it. I’m not understanding why it was removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cstdavek ( talk • contribs) 17:04, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gmilon ( talk • contribs) 13:53, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
Can you confirm that it is safe to cut and paste a paragraph from School uniform which is licensed under
Open government license v 3 if I put a statement in References before {{
reflist}}
that says:
or do we have a ready made template. ClemRutter ( talk) 10:56, 23 January 2018 (UTC)
{{
OGL-attribution}}
. Your blurb is fine. Here's mine, I have it in a sandbox: "
Your magic wand would be useful for this edit, which comes from here. Thanks. - Sitush ( talk) 15:41, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, There is a recently created user Alikhan090 ( talk · contribs) who has been repeatedly uploading Copy-right images to the English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons. First by providing the source and then under false claim of ownership. I think a warning or a small block might be warranted. Also, how should we repeat such editors in the future? ARV does not expect these and I am not aware of another mechanism. Thanks. Adamgerber80 ( talk) 15:49, 24 January 2018 (UTC)
I am only one of two english-speaking researcher working in Poum. I spent time there interviewing, and wrote an article. You have not only removed all my edits, but it is impossible to get them back. Why? The article I used in the wiki was written by me, and the reference is to the DRAFT copy, not the final version which Taylor&Francis have copyright for (unfortunately). They do not have copyright to a submitted word document at all. Even if they did, you can still quote from a published article - I am also a journal editor and know the rules. All this is a net loss to the readers and I have no real memory of all the changes, in order to recreate them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Batterbu ( talk • contribs)
Hi Diannaa, I removed those parts of content which you think promotional and amended to the most moderate version. Thanks microsoftguru
Hi Dianna, my page was deleted for copyright enfringment. i'm the system admin and i want a wikipedia page in english too, 'cause i have that in italian, bit i don't find the option to link them in between. Hope that you reply soon please! i wait for work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlessandroRibola1993 ( talk • contribs)
Wallis Budge was one of the biggest Egyptologists and Orientalists in the history he was born in 1857 and he died in 1934.he wrote many famous books such an english translation for The book of the dead which was written in egyptian hieroglyphs ,he also mentioned the etymology of alchemy at least twice,for example in page 19 of his book "Egyptian Magic" and in page 443 of his book "Amulets and Superstitions". so i didn't use a text from another contributor in wikipedia further Wallis Budge didn't even mention the word "chemistry" in this topic,just check page 19 of his book "Egyptian Magic"and you have a direct access to this page through google books,Thanks
Hello,
You have recently added a template "too long" to the article of Lithuania, which size currently is 218 573 bites. Article of the United States is named as a Good Article and its size is 402 034 bites. Article of France size is 299 585 bites and it is not yet a GA/FA (only B-class), which means when it will reach such quality it will also be around 400 000 bites. Article of Italy size is 230 235 bites and it is also only a B-class article, which means it requires further expansion and inevitably it will cause rise of its size. It is clear that articles of countries have different standards (especially in the United States case when such a long article is named as a GA) because it requires comprehensive information about various fields. Creating a comprehensive and high quality article about country which is about 100 000 bites is impossible (according to Wikipedia:Article size articles bigger than 100 000 bites should be split). As a result, I believe that your added template "too long" from the article of Lithuania should be removed and only a discussion could be started in its talk page if it really has some issues. -- Pofka ( talk) 18:44, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. You may want to take a look. Thanks. Martinevans123 ( talk) 20:52, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi,
Could you confirm whether or not there was indeed a copyvio (I think there was) and whether I was being stupid (I think I misread the copyright notice). Does this need revdel? Thanks. Adam9007 ( talk) 02:16, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Dianna, looks like there's loads of copyvio in this article. Could you take a look? — LeoFrank Talk 05:48, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Some of the material you included in the above article appears to have been copied from the copyright article http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/10.1086/354389. Copying text directly from a source is a copyright violation. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions or if you think I made a mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 00:29, 26 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello.
There's a dispute whether this edit (and subsequent edits which show the link) should be revision deleted for violation of WP:COPYVIOEL.
@ Primefac, TonyBallioni, and Dlohcierekim: I'm pinging you because previously you have participated in similar discussion wearing an admin hat, and I'm explaining the history below. I believe the violating link (one diff above) need to be revdel'd as soon as possible, but the rest of this discussion is not urgent.
A history of related actions:
Sorry for TLDR, but I wanted everybody, including people without admin tools, to understand the full background because I want to put an end to this and focus on something more constructive. I don't know a better forum for this (maybe WP:AN?).
So, I have these questions:
Thanks. Politrukki ( talk) 11:39, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Policy forbids linking to a URL which hosts copyrighted material without permission. The link was removed, in harmony with policy. Revdel is normally used to hide outing, grossly insulting accusations, and severe BLP violations, not for links. It just disappears into the mists of revision history fog. Done. (I can imagine a URL which is grossly insulting which should be revdeled, but this isn't one of them. This one is famous and commonly used by normal people, journalist, and politicians, not creeps.)
This particular link is extremely well-known, as it's to one of the most notable political documents of the last year. Pretty much all major news sources mention and/or discuss the Trump–Russia dossier every single day. It's not every day that a sitting president is accused of being a Manchurian candidate, with more and more evidence coming forward which indicates there may be something to it. Indictments and arrests are already occurring to people very close to the president.
I use Google alerts to keep track of it, and it's hard to do. Major RS link to it all the time, and quote from it, and we are allowed to quote from copyrighted material within fair use limits. (Any copyright issues are between the copyright holder and the offending website, and have no effect on "fair use" rights or our ability to quote from said material.)
The dossier is actually hosted several places, and none fear reprisals from Steele or Fusion GPS. Keep in mind that Steele deliberately leaked the document to myriad sources. He wants it out there. I just wish that Fusion GPS would host it on their website for all to use. That would solve our problem. Fortunately major RS discuss and quote so much of it that it's available from their websites, where we can find relevant quotes to use in the context of how those RS discuss it. That's what we do here.
This is an attempt at WP:CREEP which must be nipped in the bud. Current policy is good enough. -- BullRangifer ( talk) 16:29, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Knowingly directing others to material that violates copyright might be considered contributory copyright infringement. Use of RD1 in these circumstances is arguably justified, and I don't think Primefac was out of line. TonyBallioni ( talk) 16:37, 27 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I noticed you just declined the requested the deletion for TEC Edmonton. I believe the creator and only substantive author requested deletion here and here. I remain sceptical of the article's neutrality (paid creator/editor) and notability (particularly from the point of view of thin independent sources). With the author effectively giving up on the article, not sure how useful an AfD will be? Cheers, pseudonym Jake Brockman talk 13:26, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
In response to your edit on the above site,
https://www.york.gov.uk/copyright states (ironically at very minor risk to copyright):
you may use the content contained in this website for reproduction in connection with presentations, reports, printed material, and other similar uses which are publicly distributed or displayed free of charge, including advertisements, posters, catalogues, brochures, and leaflets.
So, please clarify...
-- The Equalizer ( talk) 16:33, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for taking the time to reviewthe page TEC Edmonton. I noticed you removed the COI tag after your review, which I appreciate as it was the logical thing to do. Can I go ahead and remove the WP Paid tag on the talk page now? I don't think it looks very good and it is also untrue as I received no compensation. If that tag cannot be removed, then please go ahead and delete the page. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shahroze ( talk • contribs) 22:26, 28 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I stumbled on the above TP after I went to leave a message about maintenance template deletions but found it full of 'content' or draft which appears to copy extensively from here. Seems this is a new user who might need some pointers. As the vio is in userspace, I have not removed it (yet) not being sure if that would be the correct way to proceed. Can you help? Thanks. Eagleash ( talk) 00:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa- Re: List of William T. Hornaday Award Gold Medal recipients. Your critique seems to lack depth of content and, thus, frustrates the honest contributor. That is... I'm not sure I follow your argument. What I have offered is a simple, straight forward, highlight-reel, fact list of accomplishments of each recipient (as best I can find them and edit them) in a few phrases set off by semicolons or in one to two sentences. For the reader, this briefly helps explain why the recipient made the list. The entries are too short to pull discernible passages from anyone else's work - certainly nothing that would constitute "intellectual property." Nevertheless, I use footnotes and cite sources where the reader can read the source article and learn more, and... well... to cite sources for the content in the way that meets with generally accepted, academic standards. I will be happy to redraft something if you feel that I have missed the mark, but you will have to be more specific in identifying exactly what is at risk and how I need to make edits. The list entry you mentioned as being at risk for copyright infringement is a simple list of five facts, is footnoted and cited (in the footnote) with an external link to the cited source. In fact, I have sought to cite at least one source and external link for as many of the entries as possible. Perhaps I should ask what format would be more acceptable / defendable with regard to safeguarding copyrights? Should every paraphrased entry include the repetitive intro text "according to (cited source)..." before listing the accomplishment, or should paraphrased entries be set off with quotes, anyway, despite being paraphrased and cited? Please offer further detail and clarification. Thanks. B93 ( talk) 03:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Hello Dianne
I am working on the near-death experience page. Reference 47 is being used more than once. I have been trying to add a simple refname inside the first <ref> code, but do not succeed. References are insidea special code "Reflist | 30em" -- I am stuck. Any advice please? Have a great day Josezetabal ( talk) 08:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
{{reflist}}
template in the majority of instances where it occurs.
Eagleash (
talk) 09:38, 30 January 2018 (UTC)Hi Diannaa. Please could you take a look at the article for Folco Quilici? A user is adding vast ammounts of text from another website, but they claim WP:MYTEXT applies. Any help with this matter would be much appreciated. Thanks. Lugnuts Fire Walk with Me 09:53, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, would you mind evaluating this diff for revdel? Mortee ( talk) 15:18, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
D - see this article page. Would you please consider temp page protection for auto-confirmed users. Kierzek ( talk) 19:00, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Could you look at the 'Plot summary' section of this article please. It has a tag from 2015 with the copyvio material available in the edit window. This looks like it's been reported twice and has a directly applied template. Debouch ( talk) 21:39, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi.
Is there a template for displaying that the content in some article has been copied from a public domain? Specifically from {{
PD-USGov}}? Kindly ping me while replying, regards, —usernamekiran
(talk) 23:40, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
{{
PD-notice}}
. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 23:59, 30 January 2018 (UTC)
{{
PD-notice}}
is perfect for incorporating inside a citation. There's a selection of US templates for
Category:United States government attribution templates that are intended for use at the bottom of an article. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 00:22, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank You | |
Thank you for reviewing articles during the 2018 NPP New Year Backlog Drive. Always more to do, but thanks for participating. — Insertcleverphrasehere ( or here) 05:17, 31 January 2018 (UTC) |
Dear Diannaa, Can I ask why you removed Yehuda Bauer's referenced comment from the Wannsee Conference page? Bauer is without question the world's leading expert in Holocaust history, holding an esteemed position at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, and therefore his opinion on Wannsee is surely of great importance? I am baffled that you have deleted it. Thanks for your time. BookyDong ( talk) 16:40, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Last week, you reverted and warned Brently Perumal ( talk · contribs) on E! about the addition of copyrighted material about the South African version of the network; the user restored the material and hidden-noted that they were 'one of the Editors on www.tvsa.co.za and the the authority', suggesting a definite COI account (the site they're with seems to be a press release regurgitation site with little original content). I dug in and noticed that Zee World has also had COI fingerprints all over it and I had to revert to a clean July 2017 version to remove all of those issues. I'm tagging them with COI but judging from the COPYVIO restoration, I think they haven't gotten the point at all about it. Nate • ( chatter) 17:34, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi there - just to let you know that I've now recreated the page, without the use of CC BY-SA 4.0 materials. Many thanks! Bjohas ( talk) 19:59, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hi, sorry about the copyright screwup. I thought I had sufficiently reworded it. My bad. Thanks for your help. I am just glad I didn't lose much more of the editing, which evidently passed muster. Yours, Quis separabit? 21:16, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
Hey @Diannaa The Drake Foundation Wiki page is being edited so please can you take a look and approve please. Many thanks Sunil — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunil chauhan2018 ( talk • contribs) 20:38, 1 February 2018 (UTC)
{{subst:submit}}
to the top of the draft page. This will get your draft in the queue for approval. This process may take a while as there's quite a backlog. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 23:04, 1 February 2018 (UTC)Hi Diannaa. Could you take a look at Chatham Granite Club as well as Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2018 February 2 and make I did everything correctly? It appears that quite a bit of the history section was copied-and-pasted from the club's official website. I'm not sure how far back it goes who who intitially added it, but the content has been there for quite a while and has just been moved around a bit is some recent updates. I think it goes back to content added by IP 70.24.45.213 in September 25, 2015 at 22:49 (I'm not providing diffs so as to not create any more cleanup). This might mean that every edit since then will have to be revdel. -- Marchjuly ( talk) 04:12, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, ILoveCaracas has been moving some pages without first seeking consensus or discussing it in the article's discussion page. I left the user a message yesterday on one move with which I do not agree, this one since, that means, that, for the sake of consistency, other articles on Spanish cities or towns would also have to be moved to indicate the province instead of just, in this case, Zaragoza, as it appears in Spanish wiki. I could live with it, but this recent move, today, is not, in my opinion, correct. As I just explained to the user, there were several "Cortes de León" in different years, some more relevant than others, but this one, the one in 1188, was particularly important and has its own separate article also in es.wiki (there is also a general article for Cortes de León). I am not sure how to go about it, reverting to the previous title. Could you please help? Also, perhaps you can tell the user that before he makes any move, he should first seek consensus or request the page move so that there may be some discussion before the move is made. Many thanks, Maragm ( talk) 12:14, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, so you recently edited the Randal Bryant page, and I wonder how can I see changes between the current and prev version? Also, the image was added from Prof. Bryant website. If there's no claim of legal license, can I contact him personally to ask for permission? How can I show the legality to wiki? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rosieswj ( talk • contribs) 14:43, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I really don't get the difference between your edits and what was there before. In my last edits I said that the material was from Tunisian cuisine, what am I supposed to do more ? Also, the content isn't exactly just copied, it is readapted (and often shortened) to the context in which it is used from its references. Asmodim ( talk) 16:46, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Tony just created Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to investigate copyright matters. It's probably different enough from Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to handle RevisionDelete requests to not be considered overlap, so I thought I'd point it out to you. Primefac ( talk) 17:09, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Just an FYI to you and stalkers that I was looking over WP:CV today, and noticed that there wasn't an easy way to identify admins who were comfortable working in copyright, even though approaching an admin individually is often the easiest way to handle copyright issues for people who aren't that familiar with the policy. I went ahead and created the category to try to help. Thought you and anyone else who follows this page might be interested in it. TonyBallioni ( talk) 17:10, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, the usual--looks like nearly all of the history section was copied. Rev/deletion? Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 17:37, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
And lots of the same here. For when you have a quiet moment. Best, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 18:03, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
But so very much deserved. Thank you. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 18:29, 2 February 2018 (UTC) |
Thank you ~! — Diannaa 🍁 ( talk) 18:40, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I suspect that most of this article is a copyright violation, because it was copied from here, 88% match to current version (it's PBS but it's still copyrighted, I believe) and the last clean version is this 13 November 2012. I wasn't sure what to do, so I contacted you because I saw you active in the copyright sections. - kyykaarme ( talk) 10:29, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diana, Thank you for letting me know about Wikipedia attribution policy, which I did not know about. I have now implemented a link to Sugar candy. I am not sure how to carry out any other requirements that there may be, and would welcome your help. I am logging off now and may not be in touch for a few days. So please feel free to make any necessary attributions. 81.131.172.217 ( talk) 13:16, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa, I am writing about the modifications I recently did in the article about healthism. Thank you very much for your message and sorry for the absolutely involuntary infringement of the copyright code that Wikipedia adopts. Actually, I wrote the introduction of a special issue of an academic journal devoted to the topic of healthism and I thought to publish on Wikipedia a shorter version of this article, whose aim is to provide a map of this concept. Since the article is published under an open access journal (Eä) and then published in HAL, which is a French open archive where each author keeps their intellectual property rights, I would like to ask you, if I can release my intellectual property rights and publish on Wikipedia. Best regards, Mauroturrini ( talk) 18:44, 3 February 2018 (UTC) Mauroturrini
Hi Diannaa, Thanks for your message. I actually want to delete the file but don't know how and could not find any information on this. The image is already available under the name "Didier Stainier, PhD.jpg" on the German Wikipedia and this is the one I used when creating the article in my sandbox. I will be happy to delete it if you point me in the right direction. Thanks! Scairp4 ( talk) 15:24, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Diannaa, here's one that requires repeated protection against copyright violation. More rev/delete fun. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 16:54, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
This is User:Moscowamerican.
I used my "right to disappear"
Wikipedia:Clean_start to change my user name because of the treatment that I was receiving. I have not edited this article or any other since I changed user names.
I would like to formally dispute the deletion of Head transplant material. I was thinking about a formal request for comment. WP:RfC.
But maybe, just maybe (cross my fingers), we can resolve this here amicably without a formalized process.
Thoughts ma'am? Infinitepeace ( talk) 22:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Had an old 'watch this page' link to your page, found this icon (button?) and copied it. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress is one of my all time favorit books. Cheers! Shir-El too 23:11, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, earlier on Sunday, Nihlus moved this from the published status to draft status which indicated it required review. Which might take 2-3 months. But now, at approximately 0240 UTC 5 February, you have simply deleted it with no explanation per your note on /info/en/?search=User:Martha.Savage/sandbox/Kelly_Robert_Savage (I do not know the proper way to reference a deleted page to you here). Does this constitute a review, with zero feedback? I Billspindler am not the original author, that was Martha.Savage . She added the original COI tag. I reviewed it and agreed to publish it as I do not have a similar conflict of interest. Can your explain and suggest a path forward? Thanks... Billspindler ( talk) 03:19, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
You scrubbed a stretch of the history of this article for copyvio, but I see the same IP restored text in this edit not long after. Am I being too cynical in suspecting it was substantially similar? If I should post this at some noticeboard, please let me know; I came to the article as a result of an AN/I report, and I'm not sure it's just the IP. Yngvadottir ( talk) 18:01, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
I really should have thought of that. the "ampersand" nbsp thing. You'd think after all those years of computers and webpages that I'd get something so simple. Sigh - guess retirement isn't all it's cracked up to be. Oh well - Thank you very much Diannaa — Ched : ? — 19:24, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I am a PhD student working with professors of international economics (from SIS, American University) to improve the quality of the page on comparative advantage, which is often consulted by our undergraduate students. I do not understand why you deleted the latest iteration of the section on "Deardorff's general law of comparative advantage", as it is simply a summary of a seminal article that needs to be mentioned in the page (we also had changed the wording of this summary based on your previous feedback) and as we cite the said article. I do not also understand why the section on "natural experiment of Japan" has been partially deleted and the adjacent figure removed: it does no longer make sense. The owners of the graph (Profs Daniel Bernhofen and John Brown) gave permission for this graph to be used on Wikipedia. I totally understand concerns about copyright: in this regard, would you mind being specific when you refuse an edit? Again, we are simply trying to improve a page that is often consulted by students and that currently does not reflect the nature of the academic research and debates on this issue. All best, Manreiii — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manreiii ( talk • contribs) 22:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi,
I've been looking at the Creative Commons website (specifically, here and here), and they both say that CC-BY-SA 1.0 text can only be reused under CC-BY-SA 1.0. Unless I'm much mistaken, this makes it incompatible with Wikipedia (because it uses CC-BY-SA 3.0). Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright lists CC-BY-SA 1.0 as compatible, but provides no source to back it up. Is there a problem here? If I'm right (and I hope I am not!), Template:CC-notice needs to be updated, and there may need to be a mass copyright cleanup operation. I really do hope this is a false alarm, but the way I'm interpreting what Creative Commons says, I don't see how we can use CC-BY-SA 1.0 text on Wikipedia. Am I missing something? Thanks. Adam9007 ( talk) 01:42, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
The version 1.0 ShareAlike licenses require that adaptations be made under exactly the same license as applied to the original work.Can someone ( Primefac, TonyBallioni?) please tell me I'm an idiot who has got this all wrong? Adam9007 ( talk) 02:13, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Good day Diannaa Just received notice of deleting one edit I done on the page - Under Section of Scientific Publications I added to my own publication one picture and added two sentences describing 10 years of my research in it. That has nothing to do with autobiography as you claim, or violating authors rights - I am the author. Can you please read what you deleted and realize that has nothing to do with person on the page but in two sentences summarize work that has been done through out 10 years of research. Sorry if I misunderstand it and delete this note, thank you. Kind Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robvancina ( talk • contribs) 04:05, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa I humble request to you. can you check the data in article Jaiswal Brahmin. There is maximum data without reference. Can you please remove unsourced data. Atrisomkshraj ( talk) 10:27, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, there was apparently significant copyvio on this article. Given how much of the article has been deleted, I'm guessing that a number of revisions should be hidden. Can you please take a look when you get the chance? Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 14:14, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Good morning, Diannaa, recent edits appear to have introduced copied content, and may require the mysterious magic of rev/deletion. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 15:08, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Can you delete the hymenectomy article so that I can get it right? I don't know what the problem is. This is the second time in two days that I've caused a copyright problem. I'm going to rework it offline to get it right and take more time in editing. Then I will re-create it. Thank you very much. Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 16:31, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Diannaa, it's been a while! I though you might be able to give a quick answer to this: what do we do when we get a complaint that a fair-use image ( this one) is being used without permission from the copyright holder? The file is taken from here, and has a large "copyright" watermark across it. My own feeling is that we should respect the rights of the owner if there's been an objection, but I wondered if this has come up before, and if so, what the outcome was? For reference, OTRS ticket 2017073110012929. Thanks! Justlettersandnumbers ( talk) 20:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, same COI account returned for same promotional and copyright violations. Thanks, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 00:58, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi again, Diannaa. I went to The Walt Disney Studio Licensing website, which tells users to ask permission and contact them for quotes (or somethig). I can assume that licensing any content belonging to Disney requires a fee, which is what Getty Images has done. How would this affect screenshots and posters, like Beauty and the Beast (1991 film) and one screenshot at The Golden Girls#Cast and characters? I thought about taking one of them to FFD, but I'd like to contact you first instead. George Ho ( talk) 06:30, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
This edit is copy/pasted from, eg: here. Please can you do the honours. Thanks. - Sitush ( talk) 15:35, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
No worries - Sphilbrick has just done it. - Sitush ( talk) 15:39, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
While I don't think this is a recent phenomenon, I happened to notice in the last few weeks a number of items brought to our attention as a possible copyright issue. An editor adds material which appears to match some source and then immediately removes it.
addition, followed by removal.
While it doesn't result in the addition of copyrighted material to the article, it does require some investigation in order to determine whether revdel is necessary.
If it happen once or twice, I wouldn't bother mentioning but I probably seen it a dozen times over the last couple weeks so I'm just curious whether you or any talk page stalkers know why this occurs?-- S Philbrick (Talk) 18:11, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
I think this edit might warrant a revdel. Onel5969 TT me 19:10, 7 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I have concerns that passages of this bio are not only a bit promotional in tone and derive from COI accounts, but closely paraphrase a source. If you have a chance, could you take a look? Thank you very much, 2601, or 73.159.24.89 ( talk) 05:55, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
I have a question about the passage you recently deleted from Placebo that I thought you might be kind enough to answer. Let me preface the question by noting that my intent is not to defend the passage: in fact, the passage's author Brisawhite has only made two edits to Wikipedia to date; I reverted the first and you reverted the second (which I'm now wishing that I had done myself), so we would agree that Brisawhite has not demonstrated superb editorial judgment to date: "o-fer" as they say in baseball. I'm asking because the deleted passage raised a theoretical question in my mind that I don't know how to answer: Is it copyright violation to cite, in Wikipedia, numerical data from a study? There were three sentences in the deleted passage, none of which appeared verbatim in the cited source. The first two sentences were basically reporting statistical results: "66% of respondents felt" x, "84% of respondents felt" y, "82% of" respondents who felt y also felt z. The third sentence defined the terms used in x, y, and z. I can see that some of the phrases in x, y, and z should have been in quotation marks because they came from the cited source. But the numerical figures themselves shouldn't be changed, of course, nor would it have been wise to change the phrases in x, y, and z much, if at all, as that would have misrepresented the results of the study. So, was the solution in this case (assuming the passage was kept, which I'm not advocating) simply to add quotation marks to the phrases in x, y, and z, or should this kind of numerical data not be reported in Wikipedia at all? Again, I'm not defending the deleted passage, just interested in the theoretical question for future reference. Many thanks for your tireless work on copyvio, by the way. Biogeographist ( talk) 01:18, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
See this diff by IP as it may need redaction. Also look at contributions of IP which are problematic. He has been adding to the comments of other users, and adding (copyrighted) incorrect information to articles and I'm thinking it requires an admin's attention. Thank you in advance Atsme 📞 📧 15:04, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, there is a copy-vio at this page with this edit. It seems to be a direct copy of this web page. It came to light when the editor concerned came to the help desk with a ref error question. I fixed the ref and pointed out the copy-vio to the editor both at their TP and the HD, asking them to rewrite it as soon as... They have not done so and I believe they have probably seen one or other of the messages as I received a 'thanks' notification (for the edit). I have not as yet removed the offending text. Should it now be 'revdel'd'? It's a seemingly newish editor who might not understand about copy-vio. Thanks. Eagleash ( talk) 00:36, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi. I am genuinely sorry about the article. I really did remove and reword as much as I could and thought it was satisfactory. I haven't been creating articles for a while and have been concentrating on maintenance, so maybe I am rusty. I would to rewrite the article as I believe the subject is notable. Perhaps I can keep rewrites in my sandbox pending your review(s). Sorry, again. I know I have been editing long enough to know better and I hate being a disappointment. Thought I had sufficiently reworded it but evidently not. Yours, Quis separabit? 15:08, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa. I've tried asking Primefac about these questions, but he seems to be away right now. I wonder could you provide any guidance? Perhaps there is a handy exposition somewhere, linked from WP:COPYVIOCITE, to which Primefac already directed me. But I can't find anything. Many thanks for any help you can give.
Martinevans123 ( talk) 15:43, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
If you have time can you please check this article? Jani Babu Qawwal. I removed a copyright violation to imdb, but I don’t know how to remove the copy vio from the article’s history. Can you help? Thanks. Donald1659 ( talk) 18:22, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
Copyvio-revdel}}
. Thanks for reporting. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 18:43, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diaane, on the Near-death experience#Cross-cultural aspects, the following blog site "Hallucinatory Near-Death Experiences: Cultural Differences" is used as a reference though there are peer-reviewed journal review articles dealing with the same topic. Do you agree there is no issue replacing it with the better sources? Your thoughts? Josezetabal ( talk) 07:10, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, why you reverted my edition in Auschwitz? The article concerns Auschwitz - something that was - and is not (exists) anymore.
So an infobox should show the old location or if it is a more favorable location, it should be noted.
Auschwitz is not today. One of the things is that the Auschwitz Museum and Museum is located in Poland, but the camp was in Germany. This infobox is about the camp, so you must have it either in the old location (Germany) or in a more current location, but the current one should be noted because infobox concerns past. We can not combine the present and the past in one template
-- Swd ( talk) 13:27, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
[7] Date 23 August 1942 – 2 February 1943 (5 months, 1 week and 3 days) Location Stalingrad, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union like you moving battle in the Soviet Union to Russia.
So if the infobox is about The Camp, should be location from the time of its activity. Former camp is former location, and of corse UNESCO and Museum location is in Poland. Look how we did it in the polish Wikipedia. Infobox about Camp is with former data, and about Museum with actual. Maybe should be in english "silver star" article similar. Location Former for camp, and acual for UNESCO and Museum. I hope you will be understand me better now. For my english I'm sory. ;)greetings -- Swd ( talk) 13:54, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi!
Why have you deleted Draft: David Urankar
I am David Urankar and owner of linked page: www.davidurankar.com
Best, David — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winterd1 ( talk • contribs) 13:46, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, I noticed you removed a whole lot of copyrighted information on Hoa people and I've noticed the same source has been used on multiple articles about the ethnic Chinese communities of Southeast Asia ( Chinese Filipino, Chinese Cambodian, Laotian Chinese and Thai Chinese). Just wanted to let you know so you can have a look if there's any problem with the use of that source. Thanks. ( 120.144.30.158 ( talk) 10:33, 13 February 2018 (UTC))
Hi Diannaa, you might want to take a look at this apparent copyvio re-addition of content copied-and-pasted from the Eagle Petrochem website to the Naptha article. It looks like a definite copyvio according to Earwig's copyvio detector. Thanks. Carlstak ( talk) 12:20, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, this article has long been subjected to promotional editing by a paid account, who I've asked be blocked. But I also think that they've dropped in copyright violation passages that have since been removed. There may need to be a bit of rev/deletion. Thanks for any assistance you can provide. 73.159.24.89 ( talk) 13:45, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Dianaa. Please have a look on [[Robert Jelinek (artist))] and stop the deeting process for all the pictures on that page. Volunteer Response Team Ticket here: [Ticket#: 2018021310008323]. Thanx! -- Gantenbrink ( talk) 14:10, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
OTRS pending}}
template to each file. Processing your email will likely take a while, as they have huge backlogs right now. —
Diannaa 🍁 (
talk) 15:00, 13 February 2018 (UTC)Thanx! -- Gantenbrink ( talk) 09:57, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Diannaa, the DYK review here talks about copyvio and copy/paste, and the article was tagged with the copy/paste template. I was troubled by the (false) assertion that a low Earwig score meant that there wasn't a copyvio, and I imagine that at least some of the edits should be hidden, given the examples in the review. Can I leave this in your hands? Thanks again for all that you do in this space. BlueMoonset ( talk) 06:51, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa,
I have uploaded a new profile picture of Wim Naudé on his Wikipedia page. However, there seem to be some issues with the licensing part. I have adjusted now three times but keep receiving messages that still something is to be adjusted. Could you please assist? Thank you in advance, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maastricht52 ( talk • contribs) 13:53, 15 February 2018 (UTC)
So I was looking through Special:Contributions/Rashid.ali and was cleaning up some of the copyvios he introduced - need some revdels: of
The copyvios are generally cited to the copied from source. Thanks Galobtter ( pingó mió) 10:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa,
Thank you for your message, I will take a deep look into these information sources you gave.
The most copyrighted material would be the style definitions, because they are definition from the academics itself, you mention "direct copy or too close paraphrasing" and you are right with your statements. Moreover I understand that Wikipedia use CC BY-SA and that the copying text of copyrighted material is strict forbidden if it is not compatible with CC BY-SA.
Probably the solution would be, to make a general statement about the different kind of styles, because then it isn't own research, but also not directly copyrighted, because only some words are used from the text and every word is refereed to the author.
I will solve the translation attributions as soon as possible.
I will take a look at the licenses of these documents.
Yours Sincerely, -- Sorrow of Sophie ( talk) 15:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, I am wondering if I would be able to access the deleted revision of my sandbox page. I had an article I was working on there. Thanks Jk956 ( talk) 15:25, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Greetings. I come to you only because I saw your recent copyright work on Libyan Civil War (2011). I came across the Edward Rubin article today, and found it horribly non-neutral and violating copyright. In particular it was taking material directly from [11] and [12]. Earwig's copyvio detector found 70.7% and 58.1% confidence on those two hits respectively. I looked into the article's history, and the first introduction of the material began with User:Solntsa, a user who hasn't edited in >4 years, in 2010. I edited the last 'clean' version of the article, adding in some citations, category fixes that had been done, and wording changes to bring the article to date with his position now. Everything from this to this, inclusive, needs to be rev del'd. Could you assist please? Thanks, -- Hammersoft ( talk)
Dear Diannaa Thank you for your email about my contribution to the article about Sacadura Cabral. I used only material that I own the copyright together with my collaborators. Of course I took it from the our publication that I put in the references. Is there any other article that you found similar? If that is the case, please send me the reference, because I own the copyright of the text I have used. Thanking you in advance, I remain, Yours sincerely, Jorge M M Barata ( talk) 17:42, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Diannaa: The following I posted following the information you posted on the Mount Tabor page. This is a problem, it is explained below.
@Diannaa: Since I am the one that originally wrote it, and copied by someone else and added to the site mentioned, and we are talking about a legal treaties that are on file at the Texas State Archives in Austin, there is no copyright issue and it should not be removed. There is no copyright instances on anything I have written except documents which are public from the 1840's and not subject to copyright. As a historian, genealogist, I may be lacking knowledge in Wiki, but not history. Nor as a former CFR judge would I determine any copyright of my original information. Please contact me before you start removing things. I welcome, tweeking to make it more Wiki friendly, as I have a lot to learn, but this nonsense has happened to me before about the Mount Tabor Indian Cemetery, where I put it on Wikipedia, only to have somebody say it was on another site and remove it. YES, information of mine on that site. Same on the Treaty of Birds Fort, where somebody took it off, only to have somebody else put it back up later. Suggestions is better than removal in this instance.
Terran57 (talk) 21:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Terran57Terran57 (talk) 21:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Diannaa: a second thought those treaties were OUR treaties, my tribe, my people, my family of which I am the elected Chairman. That in it's self states you have no right to remove them. You may not understand tribal sovereignty, but this is a violation of such. Also, show me ANYWHERE on the net referencing the Treaty with the Fredonian Republic!
Terran57 (talk) 21:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Terran57Terran57 (talk) 21:11, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Terran57 ( talk) 21:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Terran57 Terran57 ( talk) 21:22, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
@Diannaa: Thank you for revisiting this. No I didn't write it recently, in fact it was first put out there on an MTIC website in the 90's. The words are mine verbatim and were initially seen by me on Wikipedia on the Battle of Salado Creek page, but that has since been changed. I have seen them or very close renditions on a number of other websites and Wiki pages over the years. I have no problem with people using my words, but I want to use them myself! I actually got that comment from a Texas State Representative over 20 years ago, who said basically the same thing, thus I jumped on the "never abrogated by Congress" and used that in briefs dealing with our state recognition as well as our thoughts of reopening the case for the Bowles Treaty that we last lost before the Indian Claims Commission in 1953 (I wasn't born yet to be there!). My contention was and is that the reason we received an adverse outcome in 53 was that Birds Fort treaty was not included. Anyway, that's why I know that statement. Since it has been rehashed dozens of times, I don't know if the author of the Cherokee page would know where they got it. It has been on there for a while. Again, thank you for your response. I have already had to fight about this site when one gentleman listed it fr deletion as fraud. He never bothered to look, but later apologized, but I am till learning Wiki and I have had things changed and removed, that should not have been, only in one instance for somebody else recreating it. Please forgive me for being touchy about this. My knowledge of comprehending Wiki [[ ]] or {{ }} is at this point beyond me. I am attempting to adapt as fast as I can at this point. About 15 years ago when Wiki was very new, I created several pages. I have no idea of the username I had then. I started Terran57 about 10 years ago, but due to health and changes I did not keep up with, I have been left long in the dust. Working on it. Never knew anything about signatures until 2-3 days ago! Believe me I have tried repeatedly to get others to build this page. I am supposed to be writing a grant for the next fiscal year right now rather than this, but I felt it imperative for reasons too long to go into, that it had to be done now. Again, thank you for your input.
Terran57 ( talk) 22:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)Terran57 Terran57 ( talk) 22:58, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Diannaa. I have identified a seven-year-old copyright violation in Gregor Mendel Institute and would like to request some revdels,
Thanks! Rentier ( talk) 11:17, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, Dianna for the information you provided.
But I would like to object that the photo I provided is in the public domain, as I did add a citation. The portrait is owned by the State of Tennessee on display at the state Museum, portraits owned by the state are allowed for public educational use.( http://www.tnportraits.org/811062-dury-george.htm) This same domain use is allowed for Governor, state legislator or other state owned portraits. That this portrait being part of the state collection is open to public use.( http://www.tnmuseum.org/Visitors/Photographic_Policy/) As well I have direct permission from the person who took the photo for the state.(Which I could supply in written forum.) I did crop the photo from it's original size to Better fit the page.
(As well as the other citation from the gallery I wrote that myself on Dury.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benjamin.P.L ( talk • contribs) 17:50, 17 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you, Dianna for the information you provided.
The original content of the article is taken from the official website of the of Kerala and it is not a copy right web page. The site http://www.justkerala.in/kerala-govt-departments/agriculture-department has copied the content from the official website. So they have no copy right on the content (the right vested with http://www.kerala.gov.in). So I think there is no copy right problem with the content. But even if you are not satisfied with my explanation, I will try to re-write it.
Expecting your reply. Sanu N ( talk) 03:21, 18 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa,
I very much appreciate your point of view here. Please allow me to address your points, and another point that is independent of your recent edits.
First of all, without identifying myself (I assume that's a Wiki policy?), I should say that I am NOT Daniel Zwerdling. I'm a scientist and longtime chairman of a science department at a major university. However, as someone who believes that journalism truly is the 4th branch of government, I have followed his career for a very long time. I am NOT in the news, media, etc business.
My first set of edits were triggered by my having visited Wikipedia out of curiosity to see what was there for Zwerdling, since he has recently retired. I was shocked to see that someone (several different usernames actually) have made edits that change the nature of the Wiki entries from being factual and informative. Instead of what was there previously (for instance, before December 2017 when I last looked) there was a section about allegations of sexual harassment etc. These allegations are slanderous, biased, and there has been no due process to address them. I make no assumptions in the motives of the people(s) who have made the Wiki changes to add the allegations, however these allegations are all unsubstantiated, vague, and except in one case, anonymous. In my humble opinion, these kinds of things, until proven, have no business in something like Wikipedia, and accomplish nothing other than to serve as someone's way of "punishing" something they believe needs punishment. That is not how we do things in this country.
I am therefore asking your advice as to what the right thing to do is. I'm not sure of the correct process here, and I do not want to get into an editing war, however I feel very certain about this. If you think I should contact the person who made the edits today (2/18), then I'm willing to do so. Note that the username of that person is "StopEditingYourOwn", indicating that they believe Zwerdling is doing the editing, and clearly they are trying to punish him for what in their mind they believe to be true.
Now to the edits that you made to what I had done on Feb 17. I appreciate your email describing Wikipedia’s strict rules. They seem designed to help ensure accuracy and protect copyright infringements. That’s how I interpreted the links you sent, as well as your statements about not being able to quote more than brief passages from other sources. Perhaps I should explain what happened to prompt my editing on Feb 17. What I used for my information was material that I asked Zwerdling to give me. I did this on my own initiative, and he sent me the bio that was at one point on the NPR web site, plus some recent awards mentions. I edited the material and placed it in the Wiki page.
I believe that the material prior to when the slanderous edits about sexual harassment was made was itself inaccurate and so far from being the kind of comprehensive information that Wikipedia is known for that I felt that I had to fix it. For instance, previously he was referred to as a "reserve" broadcaster, when in fact he was one of NPR’s senior on-air personalities and one of the nation’s leading investigative journalists. I know, because I’ve closely followed and admired his groundbreaking reporting at NPR for almost 40 years. He has had a career that has had about as much impact as you can have in the journalism world, winning awards, and breaking stories that had national impact and resulted in changes in policy (from food to organic farming to PTSD and traumatic brain injury). As to the details of your edits, you cut the quotes by the directors of the Alfred I. duPont awards, one of the most coveted awards in journalism, calling him a “legend” in public broadcasting. I will review the Wiki rules but wouldn't this quote be appropriate if I noted a reference?
What I propose as far as the contents of his page is for me to go to the links that you provided, read up on what Wikipedia requires, and try to come up with something that conforms. I can then send it to you before posting, just to keep from having the page bouncing around, however I would very much like for you to restore it to what it was after your edits (16:12 and 16:06 today).
Please reply, and many thanks for all of your work. Wikipedia is a national treasure (as is Zwerdling!!!!).
Visitorfromthefuture ( talk) 02:09, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa, Just wanted to let you know that I have cleaned up the content of the former page " Food security in Mexico" that was deleted and will be posting the content on my sandbox. Thanks, please let me know if there are any problems. Jk956 ( talk) 04:20, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
I was the reviewer that initiated the copyright investigation of this article, and it came up on my watchlist as having been republished. Earwig gives it a clean bill of health, but I can still find what seem like copyvios of for example this site and this one by searching for certain phrases. Are you happy with the present version of the article? Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 11:59, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Some years ago I already had contact about the drawing. The reaction was: "nice picture by the way". It is done by my late wife in 2001. I am her widower and made the photograph in 2001. We lived nearby in the house Tanyfoel (Below the Hill) Romeinsekeizer ( talk) 14:08, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diannaa, We greatly appreciate your help, particularly from a senior editor. Unfortunately, the last time we worked on our Midshipmans Prayer article, we could not figure out how to communicate with you in order to relate that the prayer is not copyrighted and was created by my Grandfather, Chaplain Thomas, when he was Command Chaplain at the US Naval Academy and under the employment of the Federal Government as a Navy Chaplain. We hope this resolves the issue. We did determine that the Lords Prayer and the Gettysburg address are in full text in their respective Wikipedia articles and presumably not copyrighted as is the Midshipmans Prayer. We look forward to your continued assistance as we are novices at this process. You might take look at William N. Thomas, Wikipedia article which we did as our first article which is replete with citations and credits. Our very best Richard Templeton and Sharon Hansen Eaward24 ( talk) 14:27, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
We need assistance with a change to the title of the page. We would like it to read Midshipman Prayer. We have been unsuccessful in our attempts. Can you please assist? Richard and Sharon Eaward24 ( talk) 16:31, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I've removed some copyright violation--article has a promotional history. Could you rev/delete where appropriate, and check for further violations? At your convenience, of course. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 15:05, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
Problems
{{sfn}}
are not visible in the references list whilst editing.
[18]
[19]Changes later this week
Meetings
Future changes
Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
22:55, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa, Thank you so much for your help and suggstions. I was working to update the content in a correct format and valid contents with references. Please, coulld you check if aaverything is according to the Wikipedia Law in order to publish the page correctly? Thank you in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BudapestValladolid ( talk • contribs) 18:13, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
Is there a way to verify if a source is in public domain? For example, how should we check if https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/press-release-archive-1995/pr112895.html is in public domain? I mean, other than ".mil are usually in public domain". Is there any easy way to spot a declaration on these sites stating "we are releasing this information in public domain, no need to get your lazy butts in a twist, you can simply copy and paste this stuff wherever you want"? Kindly ping when replying. Also pinging Megalibrarygirl as she is literally a librarian, and also, familiar with PD works. —usernamekiran (talk) 20:34, 20 February 2018 (UTC)
{{
PD-notice}}
or {{
CC-notice}}
or manually like this (for example): "
Unless a copyright is indicated, information on the Central Intelligence Agency Web site is in the public domain and may be reproduced, published or otherwise used without the Central Intelligence Agency's permission.Which is really relieving, cuz who'd want to contact CIA, eh? —usernamekiran (talk) 21:28, 20 February 2018 (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
M.chohan (
talk •
contribs)
Hi! I`m just back from vacations and I see my content about Maria Curie-Skłodowska University in Lublin was removed due to some copyright problems, BUT I work at this University (my University has all the copyright for this texts) and it was my task to update this article. What can we do with this? Please help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NataliaDer ( talk • contribs) 08:40, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
I cannot find the text you are objecting to for copyright reasons. How do I see it? deisenbe ( talk) 14:58, 21 February 2018 (UTC)
Ok... did some revising... please let me know if this is enough to make it no longer a copyright vio. Blueboar ( talk) 00:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC) Blueboar ( talk) 00:48, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Did some revising... let me know if I need to do more. Blueboar ( talk) 00:50, 22 February 2018 (UTC) Blueboar ( talk) 00:50, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, I don’t believe this is a copyright violation. The information I used comes directly from MY national association’s advocacy page. These documents were designed by the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists. The association allows its members, which I am one, to use these advocacy documents however we choose without concern of copyright violations. Bottom line, using the content of these publications is exactly what they were designed for. They are even referenced. Will you kindly restore the additions made to these pages?
Also, why did you remove the “also known as nurse anesthesiologist?” These changes were made by a board certified CRNA and member of the American Association of Nurse Anesthetists. Who better to authenticate legitimacy of the information?
The information on the OANA webpage, which is a state association affiliated with the national association, is the identical document produced by the AANA; a document that the AANA not only authorizes but encourages it’s members to use. We have full rights and discretion to use this information.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiftytoone ( talk • contribs)
Dear Diannaa Thank you for your notification on African Journal of Mathematics and Computer Science Research draft copy. I am a staff of http://academicjournals.org/. You can verify from the email address I used in opening an account on Wikipedia. Academic Journals is going forward and wants all her journals and the company to have a page on Wikipedia. I will be glad if the content is not removed because i intended placing the other journals draft copies for review. Thank you for your time and consideration.--Samson at AcademicJournals 13:50, 23 February 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samson at AcademicJournals ( talk • contribs)
I noticed this website has copied many of Wikipedias articles Investoa ( talk) 15:12, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, can you have a look at this promotional article? I suspect there's a lot more copyright violation content than I found so far. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 15:56, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Although St Edmund's School Canterbury may need a little rev/deletion again for persistent copyvio. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 16:39, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
Hey, Diannaa. Would you mind taking a look at Ken Selzer, specifically the most recent additions? The following pictures may be eligible for deletion as well: File:KenHeadshot.jpg and File:Ken Deb Farm 2.jpg. Thanks, Corky 17:42, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
You may wish to revoke talk page access.-- Cahk ( talk) 08:21, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello, You removed my content from this page. I am the author of both articles, wikipedia and Asylum Projects (my name is idetical with Asylum Projects), which are fundamentally different and composed for different purposes. Asylum Projects is interested in the the physical apparatus of the campus, not its broader social context. For that reason the content I created is different as it has a different audience. Moreover, a simply cut and paste job would not require so many edits as documented in the page history, nor would there be any public utility to such an article.
In terms of the question of intellectual property, I released this information to Asylum Project as part of a deal through NSH Historical Society. They do not possess the copyright to my work, nor is that work identical to what I provided them with.
In short, I have no idea why you removed my work. I understand that the article needs to be better tailored to the purpose I outlined above, but it is a work in progress. Please restore this page to its amended form. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerbiePocket ( talk • contribs) 18:03, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
I can see that you're more knowledgeable about this process, but it does seem deeply circuitous, as I would also need to get both Asylum Project and NSH-Historical Society involved as well... and they are not speedy with such inquiries. Particularly as the latter meets only twice a year. Wouldn't it be more advantageous to remove the content you believe is in violation of site policy, rather then simply throwing everything out? Much of the content you removed had nothing to do with Asylum Project. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerbiePocket ( talk • contribs) 18:29, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Diana, that is simply not true, and it is documentable that it is not true. There's no reason to be obtuse. I will take this to higher site official if needs be. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HerbiePocket ( talk • contribs) 18:40, 24 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for your attention Robert, but that is not the nature of my dispute. My grip is this- yes, some material was taken from Asylum Project, but it rested in the minority. I understand that you have concerns with copywright. That much is clear. However, it was not the Asylum Project material that was removed. Everything was removed, which is not a matter of site policy, nor of intellectual property, and that it is what I am asking to have restored. You will see quite clearly in comparing the two documents that this Wikipedia article has several sections that have no parallel to Asylum Project (ie. List of Superintendents, Popular Culture, Modern Hospital). I am NOT disputing the site policy on copyright.
I have already contacted Asylum Projects and personally removed my content from there site until this issue is resolved.
Hi Diannaa, this needs you rev/deletion magic again. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 ( talk) 02:34, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, I didn't even think of geolocating the IP. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 20:09, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Hello. Could you please take a look at this edit on Saadat Hasan Manto? Copied verbatim from the source by the looks of it, by an editor with a troubled past here (blocked four times so far, for edit-warring, disruptive editing and POV-pushing...), who now seems to have branched into making copyvios too. Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W talk 21:20, 25 February 2018 (UTC)
Blog used as reference Hello Diaane, on the Near-death experience#Cross-cultural aspects, the following blog site "Hallucinatory Near-Death Experiences: Cultural Differences" is used as a reference though there are peer-reviewed journal review articles dealing with the same topic. Do you agree there is no issue replacing it with the better sources? Your thoughts? Josezetabal (talk) 07:10, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
The place to ask this kind of question is the reliable sources noticeboard. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:37, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Thank-you Diannaa, very kind of you - best Josezetabal ( talk) 06:00, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
I understand your concerns regarding COI. However, that is a guideline and it shouldn’t be enforced when the information is irrefutable and cited. I only added facts from information that is readily available to the public and has no copyright infringements. Nothing I added is controversial or inaccurate and can be found with a simple search which makes it common knowledge.
The fact is, the Nurse Anesthetist page is inaccurate and out of date. How is one supposed to go about updating it? Who has that privilege? Isn’t it the goal of Wiki to have its pages up to date and accurate for the edification of its readers? Fiftytoone ( talk) 11:03, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
this edit summary needs revdeling as copyvio of [21]. Thanks Galobtter ( pingó mió) 17:00, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Dianaa. I already made The Secret Musical Life of Pets as a hoax and I don't want the film to exist on Wikipedia, because it is not a place to collect made-up stuff. Joeymiskulin ( talk) 20:36, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
Dear Diana, Thank you for pointing out my mistakes and making me understand Wikipedia in a better way. I tried to use the sources from a verified source, newspaper articles in my last edit. I still don't understand where it went wrong. I will take care of the points that you have mentioned in my last edit and try not to make those mistakes again in future. Mahi Jaiswal ( talk) 10:40, 27 February 2018
Hi, Diannaa. I don't think we've ever interacted, but I've seen posts you made to user talk pages patiently explaining copyvio policies so I thought you would be the right person to come to. Could I ask you to look at the Long-term Prospects section of the Catalan independence movement article, which was recently added by User:rolf h nelson? It is eight sentences long with six refs. So far, so good. But the wording of each of the eight sentences contains a copy and paste, or a close paraphrase, of a sentence in the respective source. I don't know if the editor could validly claim that each sentence only took a small number of words from each source, so it's not violating copyright. My gut feeling is that it is copyvio, but I'd rather have the word of somebody that knows the policy. Of course, I could just re-write the section, if I thought it was worth keeping, but I'm not at all sure it's needed. It has already been removed twice by another editor, and replaced both times. My other concern would be that the user might be doing the same thing on other articles – he is quite a prolific editor. Regards, Scolaire ( talk) 09:55, 27 February 2018 (UTC)
—but is this OK for us? Hope you're well—sorry to bother you there. ...SerialNumber 54129 ...speculates 14:27, 27 February 2018 (UTC)