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 80 | ← | Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | Archive 89 | Archive 90 |
Hi Diannaa, could you take a look at the suggested changes on my user talk page? Vacosea ( talk) 21:25, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I hope you are well. Recently you said I was in violation of copyright while editing Board of Deputies of British Jews. Your copyrighting tool shows 66% of the content is the same as source. I would be glad to rewrite the content in a way that does not duplicate the original source. Please be aware a significant element was simply an important quote from the original Board of Deputies founders which would not be copyrighted. I am a bit confused why the edits were deleted rather than reversed, as this caused of hours of work to be wasted and is demotivating. Please could you advise on what is allowable under copyright rules from academic sources? Thank you.
92.19.30.89 ( talk) 02:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
I noticed that you've edited this page in the past. I have the Editor of the Week user box on my user page and there's now a nasty big red-link instead of a link to the nomination page (or whatever). So something is wrong with the code and I don't know what. Could you please take a look and maybe fix it? I've also left this note on the last couple of editors who've edited this user box. Thanks, Shearonink ( talk) 03:47, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
This edit [Har Ki Doon: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia] by user User:Cscrajabpur on Har Ki Doon seems to have added both a copyvio and a spam ref. I have had difficulty in linking the edit in question done at 0626 2 March 2023. They have done similar on other articles. SovalValtos ( talk) 08:00, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
Can I ask where you find the copyright information on this PDF? https://www.harlow.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Mark%20Hall%20North%20character%20appraisal%20and%20management%20proposals.pdf
It does not state that it is copyrighted anywhere that I can see or that it needs a license or permissions, so worry I have missed something?
And all of the other source information is over 100 years old. And author is deceased over 70 years. It is in the public domain, used and credited as such.
As far as I am aware it is a public document. Stated here https://www.flickr.com/photos/146476077@N05/40783114393/in/album-72157709115665607 it is also used here with no info or credits. https://www.mun.ca/harlow/about-harlow/historical-geography-of-harlow/medieval-villages-and-manors/
The source website states it is “free content” from “The Victoria History of the County of Essex. Vol.8 - The Victoria History of the Counties of England by W. R. Powell, University of London.
https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo0008unse_t7h7/page/n1/mode/1up
it’s Publication date was 1903 over 100 years ago.
and many other volumes; https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo04doubuoft https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo0006unse_j0f2/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo01doubuoft/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo0004unse/page/n10/mode/1up
File:The Victoria history of the county of Essex BHL21650124.jpg this file is also from the same book and is already on wiki comms which states Credit: NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT. And that the image is in the public domain.
As are many other items from the same book; “The Victoria History of the County of Essex. - The Victoria History of the Counties of England by W. R. Powell, University of London. are on here already. And they all seems to be perfectly fine, so where did I go wrong ?
What do I need to change or show to make the file valid? I am very new here so still getting use to how it all works.
I am very confused as to what needs to be done, changed or amended. If you could kindly advise what needs to be happen, and how to go about that, as i am a bit lost with how this site works. I have tried to look into and read about it, but just get more confused and seem to be doing it all wrong :( before I give up any help would be appreciated
Thank you DRS311 ( talk) 13:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
{{
PD-notice}}
after your citation. I have done so for the above article. Please do this in the future so that our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself, and that it's okay to copy verbatim. Thanks, —
Diannaa (
talk) 14:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
"use of all material on this site is for information and for non-commercial or your own personal use only; any copies of these pages saved to disk or to any other storage medium may only be used for subsequent viewing purposes or to print extracts for non-commercial or your own personal use".That's not a compatible license, because our website does allow commercial use.
Like Netteswell it was a long and narrow parish, extending south from the River Stort.
In 1949 the northern and central parts were merged into the Harlow parish as part of the designated area of Harlow town, while the southern part was transferred to North Weald Bassett.
The Althams' seat was here for more than 200 years and James Altham entertained Elizabeth I here in 1571, 1576, and 1578.
... as cellars of that date were recorded in 1921. Lord Morley, the lessee, was living at Mark Hall in 1538.
Thanks Diannaa, I don’t know what to say then. I thought the website was a direct copy of the public domain book and therefore all the details would be the same.
Info post these dates was from myself and other source online and offline.
It all seems a bit beyond me and just out of my reach, so please just delete it all if needed.
I was just trying to put something together for the church and it’s very long parish history, but seems I am not the right person. It maybe just be easier to advise the sites, links and public books. Or get someone that knows this site and how it works better to make/write the article.
The maps from the public book are stated in book as Crown copyright. And I believe a ny Crown copyright protected material held by Companies House (other than the Royal Arms) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context.
Anyways, I think I will just give up here. Thanks anyways.
Best regards
DRS311 ( talk) 15:31, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello @ Diannaa: Can you please look at Fort Assiniboine Sandhills Wildland Provincial Park? Reverting the Copyvio tag removed a number of (copyright free) edits from the article. I cannot view the reverted edits to pull out the good material. Is there a way to "re-revert" or otherwise send me the most recent text so we don't lose all the good changes? Thanks, Darrend1967 ( talk) 16:57, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I am investigating a copyright violation warning from Earwig on Cataract surgery which I have done some work on recently. A couple of days ago, Earwig gave it a clean bill of health. Today I ran Earwig again and it gave red warnings of over 90% on a couple of sites. One I had never even heard of, and the other was Wikidoc, which I have heard of, but have not used myself as it looks a bit iffy, and the topic is amazingly well provided with reliable sources, compared to anything I have worked on before. Anyway, I tried some old versions, and the further back I went the closer the match, peaking at 97.9% at or near January 2007, then decreasing again further back in time, fairly rapidly.
My take on this is that the Wikipedia article is the original, as it developed gradually and systematically, with no major text additions around that time, but quite a bit of copy editing, and was probably copied over to Wikidoc with some minor changes and reformatting somewhere around Jan 2007, and has remained there virtually unchanged ever since, while our article has drifted away from that version in fits and starts as is normal. I saw no copy attribution at Wikidoc, by the way, but it may be somewhere that I missed.
My questions:
Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:08, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, in this edit you reverted recent additions to History of Algeria, with the summary remove inappropriate and unattrubuted copying of multiple Wikipedia articles into this article with which I fully agree. Subsequent edits seem to have reintroduced similar problems and I suspect may also be unattributed copies, but even the version that you reverted to is a bit of a mess, tbh, and I think contains an (unattributed?) copy of Kingdom of Tlemcen. I am unsure what to do with the article (I found it through reference gnoming) – would you mind taking another look at it? Thanks, Wham2001 ( talk) 20:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello everybody. There's quite a few cases listed right now at CopyPatrol, and they seem to be coming in at a higher rate than in the past. There were more than 150 new cases posted today! You don't have to be an admin to do this task. Here is the detailed instructions and documentation. Pinging a few people who have helped in the past: DanCherek; Wiae; Ymblanter; Red-tailed hawk; Crow; Moneytrees; Sphilbrick; Hut 8.5; Wizardman; L3X1. I will also post at WP:AN. Thanks for any assistance; much appreciated. — Diannaa ( talk) 00:49, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Excellent work so far people! We have reduced the backlog considerably already, from well over 150 down to 85. Cheers, — Diannaa ( talk) 02:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Down to 63 reports. Thanks so much. You folks are awesome! — Diannaa ( talk) 02:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, Can I ask a question on copying the entire text of public domain information? Is it deemed acceptable, or do we insist on at least some effort of rewriting? I came across this article which shows a 95.8% copy. The user who created the article has created 550 articles in the last two years, so before going through these, I thought I'd find out what the situation actually is with straight copying of PD information. Pinging @ SandyGeorgia, as the last person I've worked with on copyright questions. Many thanks! - SchroCat ( talk) 11:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
{{
Source-attribution}}
template. So it's not a copyright violation; it's properly done from a copyright point of view. However Wikipedia is not intended to be a repository for public domain content; that's what Wikisource is for. The intention with Wikipedia was that we should be writing our own articles. But that's not a copyright question, and it's a question that is better discussed elsewhere. —
Diannaa (
talk) 13:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)How do you handle situations like this: Oral Roberts
Where the material is a press release with an acceptable license, not simply used as a source, but largely copied and pasted? S Philbrick (Talk) 12:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I hope you are well. As an admin with experience on Holocaust-related content, I'd be grateful if you could intervene in a dispute at Union générale des israélites de France. I think the issue should be reasonably straightforward but I may of course be wrong. The editor involved has just left a threat on my talk page and I am keen for it not to escalate. — Brigade Piron ( talk) 08:43, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I re-added the objects clause in the Iona Institute article as it is not a mission statement. The objects clause legally restricts the activity of the company. Carrying out activities that are not included in the objects clause is know as acting ultra vires, or beyond their legal power, and those actions would be void. This is much stronger than a self-drafted mission statement or company slogan. HylandPaddy ( talk) 17:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
The contributions by 74.143.190.89 on Talk:Big Mac look like the work of a kid bullying another. Are they something you would normally revdel? Thanks! Dorsetonian ( talk) 18:56, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, would you help resolve the grammar dispute at
Talk:Castling#has or have? I surely do appreciate! --
IHTS (
talk) 23:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa. I was wondering why you deleted those two quotes that I had uploaded to the rias massacre page. They were both cited and quoted by people in well credited news outlets. I was also curious as to why u only deleted this and not the other things on the page such as the first sentence stating false numbers from a cnn report that doesn't even exist anymore. Try and clicking on the external link to it and you will get a big 404 message. My quotes will stay on that page as they are first hand accounts by witnesses who were there and were willing to risk their lives to report it to Amnesty international as well as the Algerian League for the Defence of Human Rights, so the least I can do is put there voice out there and let it be heard to the world, as the people who died in this massacre were humans and had a voice. Please explain to me how they were "unsourced" as you put it as I carefully read each article and pulled these quotes out from them.
Cheers. Marcmmep2020 ( talk) 00:16, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
"A few recounts of the massacre allow us to step into the shoes of the victims and hear the appalling things that occurred on August 28, 1997.") Please see WP:NPOV. — Diannaa ( talk) 03:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, First off, thanks for being a resource for me. I really want to do this well. This is my first article. I am trying to write something that contains and compares different points of view that don't necessarily agree and where statements are attributed to sources that can be compared. Exactly how long can a quote be? If I rewrite what someone says and then footnote it that meets copyright rules, yes? The article I found before I rewrote it seemed to simply lift whole paragraphs from other places, which from your message I assume was not the correct way to do this. I will look for anything that looks too close to the original, but I'm still a bit confused about quotes. MinorDetailer2 ( talk) 17:20, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Just wanted to reach out about the Himmler voice recording. I do agree that the sourcing is lacking but through listening to other voice recordings of him both on here and youtube its quite obvious its him. But, if you wish I can get another recording on Commons, it might be poorer quality though. ✠ Robertus Pius ✠ ( Talk • Contribs) 00:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Why did you remove the quotes on Parumala Thirumeni? It was difficult for me to add them, and now it seems very easy for others to remove them without any second thought. Lovekindman ( talk) 07:56, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, quick question. The Algemeiner appears to be copying without attribution large parts of an AFP story, modifying a few words and adding a few others. But mostly a word for word copy. Would this be a copyright violation and if so should it linked to from an article? The article is 2023 Nablus attack. nableezy - 09:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Good evening. There is not any copyright mark at https://research-management.mq.edu.au/ws/portalfiles/portal/cv/fcb42347-1676-49cb-9c81-bcd6b29af04e?locale=en_GB. The information contained at that address is not an authored work by its nature, so it is not neither intrinsically protected as a copyrighted work. But you have cloth and scissors. It is pointless to discuss with bureaucratic authority.
However, I take the liberty of noting that, even in this context, threats are out of place. Why do you threaten me with the banning? Should I lose earnings, power, or whatever? I invest some knowledge, time and will to enrich the content of Wikipedia in several languages. Where I can, I fix. I don't threaten, I don't insult. Your tone (not the remark, but the harsh tone) suggests to me that I am unnecessary, a nuisance.
With best regards, --23:39, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Inoslav Bešker ( talk) 23:39, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Greetings from that pest again. Could you check out this article? It is heavily copied from The Jewish Encyclopedia, which it claims is in the public domain, but I noticed a copyright notice at the bottom of this page. So my question, PD or not? Thanks as always. Onel5969 TT me 11:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Hey Dianna, I was wondering if there are any other tools that you use for detecting copy-pastes aside from the obvious one. For example, the wholesale copypasting of up to 300 words at a time into direct pullquotes on this page has got to be a copyright violation, surely? But on the copyvio detector it turns up nada, I'm thinking because the sources must not be digitalized yet. Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Can you please review article Battle of Kup as it seems like the content is directly plagiarized from the sources? The edit was made by an IP 2409:40D6:101F:634F:8000:0:0:0 This IP does have block on it now. Javerine ( talk) 13:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi! This is about Draft:Fall 2023 fashion weeks - I had quotations from the guardian removed, but I had only pulled them because I was trying to figure out how to best write a paragraph about the trends at Paris fashion week that included the opinions of the Guardian writer. I didn't realized that Drafts could just have things removed from them - should I put stuff like that in my sandbox when I'm working instead? Should I create all articles in the sandbox in order to avoid this? Thanks Computer-ergonomics ( talk) 21:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I thought perhaps you should be aware of this. Cheers! Chanaka L ( talk) 12:14, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
dear diana,
you claim that the references are irrelevant but they are. please undo the deletion of the paragraph! Amani rosan ( talk) 12:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
You marked List of Champion Trees (South Africa) as a potential copyright violation. I've reviewed and placed my analysis at Talk:List of Champion Trees (South Africa)#Copyright issue for "Designated Champion Trees". In short, I believe the material is PD as claimed. Can you have a look and let me know if I have missed something in my analysis? -- Whpq ( talk) 13:53, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa. I am responding to your reversion of my edit to Rudolf Hess. I am not sure why any edit that adds information about the subject of a biography and that is well sourced can be ruled "off topic." The edit well illustrates Hitler's intent, in the early days of his regime, to seize more control over the levers of government by interlinking his trusted Party leadership with the government. By placing his Deputy Führer in the cabinet, he was sending a strong message. If you think re-phrasing could help clarify the point, please feel free to do so, but I believe the main point is germane and should be retained. Please reconsider your reversion in light of these comments. Respectfully, Historybuff0105 ( talk) 12:57, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
my story today |
I saw you giving an "awesome" award, and liked it. 11 years for you, DYK? - Do you think Martinevans123 could be unblocked on some kind of try-out or supervision scheme? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
I added the source of Klaus Höss birth date and death date in the Rudolph Höss document, but the document was messed up. I don't know how to modify it, so I'd appreciate it if you could modify it. 망고소녀 ( talk) 01:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
I think this editor is NOTHERE. Take a look at their talk page comments on Talk:Adolf Hitler and Talk:Mein Kampf. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 23:12, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
No, I did not completely copy it. Oddballslover ( talk) 01:12, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for helping users to improve their articles in a friendly environment. Ngsharif ( talk) 01:54, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Hiu all. There's been a very large number of cases posted at CopyPatrol in the last 24 hours; I can't possibly look ater them all. Any help appreciated! Pinging some recent participants: DanCherek, L3X1, Ymblanter, 1AmNobody24, Sphilbrick. Thanks! — Diannaa ( talk) 01:54, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi. Just want to make sure I'm interpreting something correctly regarding copyvio. This article has a large section which is a very close paraphrase from this source. Now the source isn't a .gov, and has a copyright marker on it. But the source appears to be copying from a .gov site. Am I incorrect in thinking that this is not a copyvio.
Also, I didn't see your post directly above. Remember that I don't do it regularly, but if you get a backlog like, feel free to ping me as well. Onel5969 TT me 13:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
See thread: WP:RSN#Policy violation to link to WikiLeaks
Maybe I'm misunderstanding our policies, so I'd appreciate your feedback. WikiLeaks hosts lots of illegally obtained content, and I believe we are not allowed to link to such URLs. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 22:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you reverted my edit. I get that this "sockpuppet" did make the article better while evading a block, so how about we can rewrite the article in a way we could rewrite it to better fit format but not exactly copying that sock revision. That way, the revision isn't evading a sanction while format is also met? Do you agree? I think that would be better. Pessi69 ( talk) 22:24, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Pessi69 ( talk) 01:14, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for catching the copyright violation on Temple of Athena Nike. I thought I ought to let you know that the material still exists on wiki at User:Twospoonfuls/sandbox/8. (and User:Twospoonfuls/sandbox/11 appears to be a copyvio from [2]). I mentioned this on the user in question's talk page, but they've blanked the page (as I suppose is their right), so I thought it best to bring this to you directly. Furius ( talk) 19:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello
A) I am pretty sure those other revisions of the article The Poem of the Man-God also contain some copyright infringement: [3], [4]. Could you check those? Also, it is very likely that other older revisions of this article also contain a copyright infringement, juging by the fact you only left the versions with my removal visible and that I only made those changes on 22 April 2023.
B) In my removal of unreliable sources I did on 22 April 2023, I first removed the sourced, and only after (in following edits) did I remove the information they supported. This was likely a bad idea as I did not think the now-unsourced paragraphs could be close paraphrasings.
My bad, I should have known better!
C) Could you check this month's revisions of Maria Valtorta for copyright?
I suspect the user who expanded The Poem of the Man-God (Arkenstrone) might be the cause of the copyright problem, and this user has also expanded Maria Valtorta recently. Veverve ( talk) 21:22, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa,
I noticed that you made some edits to this page, which looks like it prevents me from restoring a previous version of the article. Am I mistaken? A new editor has made some radical changes gutting the article in question, removing important factual information in order to maintain his own POV.
I don't actually have a problem with contrary POVs, as long as it's backed up by sources. But the same must be true in the other direction as well. The edits I've made in recent months add important factual information that was previously missing, which create a wrong understanding regarding the article (for example, there was no mention that the books were removed from the Index of Prohibited Books in 1962, which is crucially important information).
In any case, I've been working to improve the article, and those edits were not contested when I finished those edits many weeks/months ago. I have asked the editor in question to leave the article as it is for now, and we can discuss each point sequentally on the article talk page and come to resolution.
I've left a note to his first note on the article talk page explaining why the sources are adequate. But if he disagrees, we can address that by finding better sources, instead of gutting the article and removing 30%+ of the content. At the very least, placing a "better citation needed" tag could alert me and others to find better sources (if they are indeed required). This editor's approach by removing large portions of the article because he doesn't like the sources, is extremely disruptive. And if there are any copyright policy violations, then please bring them up, and I'll correct.
Please consider restoring the last version of the article, where we can then go through each point and resolve them one by one. That should be the starting point since the article has already stood for some months now uncontested. Arkenstrone ( talk) 21:37, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi. Could you review this request on my talk page. Your opinion whether it constitutes a copyright violation would be appreciated. -- Whpq ( talk) 01:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
You marked a recent addition to the Christendom College wikipedia as a copyright violation since the text was taken from the college's website. This is publicly accessible information and I've been given permission from the college to post it on Wikipedia. Is there anything else I need to do to be able to add this info to the Wikipedia page? Thanks! FlyPeterPan87 ( talk) 20:32, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Just figured I'd let you know that Bulbapedia is completely separate from Fandom. Doesn't matter too much since Bulbapedia is still a fan wiki. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:35, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Meh. Only 903 to go. (sigh) -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 01:18, 28 April 2023 (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 80 | ← | Archive 85 | Archive 86 | Archive 87 | Archive 88 | Archive 89 | Archive 90 |
Hi Diannaa, could you take a look at the suggested changes on my user talk page? Vacosea ( talk) 21:25, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I hope you are well. Recently you said I was in violation of copyright while editing Board of Deputies of British Jews. Your copyrighting tool shows 66% of the content is the same as source. I would be glad to rewrite the content in a way that does not duplicate the original source. Please be aware a significant element was simply an important quote from the original Board of Deputies founders which would not be copyrighted. I am a bit confused why the edits were deleted rather than reversed, as this caused of hours of work to be wasted and is demotivating. Please could you advise on what is allowable under copyright rules from academic sources? Thank you.
92.19.30.89 ( talk) 02:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
I noticed that you've edited this page in the past. I have the Editor of the Week user box on my user page and there's now a nasty big red-link instead of a link to the nomination page (or whatever). So something is wrong with the code and I don't know what. Could you please take a look and maybe fix it? I've also left this note on the last couple of editors who've edited this user box. Thanks, Shearonink ( talk) 03:47, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
This edit [Har Ki Doon: Difference between revisions - Wikipedia] by user User:Cscrajabpur on Har Ki Doon seems to have added both a copyvio and a spam ref. I have had difficulty in linking the edit in question done at 0626 2 March 2023. They have done similar on other articles. SovalValtos ( talk) 08:00, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
Can I ask where you find the copyright information on this PDF? https://www.harlow.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/Mark%20Hall%20North%20character%20appraisal%20and%20management%20proposals.pdf
It does not state that it is copyrighted anywhere that I can see or that it needs a license or permissions, so worry I have missed something?
And all of the other source information is over 100 years old. And author is deceased over 70 years. It is in the public domain, used and credited as such.
As far as I am aware it is a public document. Stated here https://www.flickr.com/photos/146476077@N05/40783114393/in/album-72157709115665607 it is also used here with no info or credits. https://www.mun.ca/harlow/about-harlow/historical-geography-of-harlow/medieval-villages-and-manors/
The source website states it is “free content” from “The Victoria History of the County of Essex. Vol.8 - The Victoria History of the Counties of England by W. R. Powell, University of London.
https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo0008unse_t7h7/page/n1/mode/1up
it’s Publication date was 1903 over 100 years ago.
and many other volumes; https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo04doubuoft https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo0006unse_j0f2/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo01doubuoft/mode/1up https://archive.org/details/victoriahistoryo0004unse/page/n10/mode/1up
File:The Victoria history of the county of Essex BHL21650124.jpg this file is also from the same book and is already on wiki comms which states Credit: NOT_IN_COPYRIGHT. And that the image is in the public domain.
As are many other items from the same book; “The Victoria History of the County of Essex. - The Victoria History of the Counties of England by W. R. Powell, University of London. are on here already. And they all seems to be perfectly fine, so where did I go wrong ?
What do I need to change or show to make the file valid? I am very new here so still getting use to how it all works.
I am very confused as to what needs to be done, changed or amended. If you could kindly advise what needs to be happen, and how to go about that, as i am a bit lost with how this site works. I have tried to look into and read about it, but just get more confused and seem to be doing it all wrong :( before I give up any help would be appreciated
Thank you DRS311 ( talk) 13:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
{{
PD-notice}}
after your citation. I have done so for the above article. Please do this in the future so that our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself, and that it's okay to copy verbatim. Thanks, —
Diannaa (
talk) 14:40, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
"use of all material on this site is for information and for non-commercial or your own personal use only; any copies of these pages saved to disk or to any other storage medium may only be used for subsequent viewing purposes or to print extracts for non-commercial or your own personal use".That's not a compatible license, because our website does allow commercial use.
Like Netteswell it was a long and narrow parish, extending south from the River Stort.
In 1949 the northern and central parts were merged into the Harlow parish as part of the designated area of Harlow town, while the southern part was transferred to North Weald Bassett.
The Althams' seat was here for more than 200 years and James Altham entertained Elizabeth I here in 1571, 1576, and 1578.
... as cellars of that date were recorded in 1921. Lord Morley, the lessee, was living at Mark Hall in 1538.
Thanks Diannaa, I don’t know what to say then. I thought the website was a direct copy of the public domain book and therefore all the details would be the same.
Info post these dates was from myself and other source online and offline.
It all seems a bit beyond me and just out of my reach, so please just delete it all if needed.
I was just trying to put something together for the church and it’s very long parish history, but seems I am not the right person. It maybe just be easier to advise the sites, links and public books. Or get someone that knows this site and how it works better to make/write the article.
The maps from the public book are stated in book as Crown copyright. And I believe a ny Crown copyright protected material held by Companies House (other than the Royal Arms) may be reproduced free of charge in any format or medium provided it is reproduced accurately and not used in a misleading context.
Anyways, I think I will just give up here. Thanks anyways.
Best regards
DRS311 ( talk) 15:31, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello @ Diannaa: Can you please look at Fort Assiniboine Sandhills Wildland Provincial Park? Reverting the Copyvio tag removed a number of (copyright free) edits from the article. I cannot view the reverted edits to pull out the good material. Is there a way to "re-revert" or otherwise send me the most recent text so we don't lose all the good changes? Thanks, Darrend1967 ( talk) 16:57, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I am investigating a copyright violation warning from Earwig on Cataract surgery which I have done some work on recently. A couple of days ago, Earwig gave it a clean bill of health. Today I ran Earwig again and it gave red warnings of over 90% on a couple of sites. One I had never even heard of, and the other was Wikidoc, which I have heard of, but have not used myself as it looks a bit iffy, and the topic is amazingly well provided with reliable sources, compared to anything I have worked on before. Anyway, I tried some old versions, and the further back I went the closer the match, peaking at 97.9% at or near January 2007, then decreasing again further back in time, fairly rapidly.
My take on this is that the Wikipedia article is the original, as it developed gradually and systematically, with no major text additions around that time, but quite a bit of copy editing, and was probably copied over to Wikidoc with some minor changes and reformatting somewhere around Jan 2007, and has remained there virtually unchanged ever since, while our article has drifted away from that version in fits and starts as is normal. I saw no copy attribution at Wikidoc, by the way, but it may be somewhere that I missed.
My questions:
Cheers, · · · Peter Southwood (talk): 10:08, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, in this edit you reverted recent additions to History of Algeria, with the summary remove inappropriate and unattrubuted copying of multiple Wikipedia articles into this article with which I fully agree. Subsequent edits seem to have reintroduced similar problems and I suspect may also be unattributed copies, but even the version that you reverted to is a bit of a mess, tbh, and I think contains an (unattributed?) copy of Kingdom of Tlemcen. I am unsure what to do with the article (I found it through reference gnoming) – would you mind taking another look at it? Thanks, Wham2001 ( talk) 20:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello everybody. There's quite a few cases listed right now at CopyPatrol, and they seem to be coming in at a higher rate than in the past. There were more than 150 new cases posted today! You don't have to be an admin to do this task. Here is the detailed instructions and documentation. Pinging a few people who have helped in the past: DanCherek; Wiae; Ymblanter; Red-tailed hawk; Crow; Moneytrees; Sphilbrick; Hut 8.5; Wizardman; L3X1. I will also post at WP:AN. Thanks for any assistance; much appreciated. — Diannaa ( talk) 00:49, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Excellent work so far people! We have reduced the backlog considerably already, from well over 150 down to 85. Cheers, — Diannaa ( talk) 02:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Down to 63 reports. Thanks so much. You folks are awesome! — Diannaa ( talk) 02:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, Can I ask a question on copying the entire text of public domain information? Is it deemed acceptable, or do we insist on at least some effort of rewriting? I came across this article which shows a 95.8% copy. The user who created the article has created 550 articles in the last two years, so before going through these, I thought I'd find out what the situation actually is with straight copying of PD information. Pinging @ SandyGeorgia, as the last person I've worked with on copyright questions. Many thanks! - SchroCat ( talk) 11:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
{{
Source-attribution}}
template. So it's not a copyright violation; it's properly done from a copyright point of view. However Wikipedia is not intended to be a repository for public domain content; that's what Wikisource is for. The intention with Wikipedia was that we should be writing our own articles. But that's not a copyright question, and it's a question that is better discussed elsewhere. —
Diannaa (
talk) 13:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)How do you handle situations like this: Oral Roberts
Where the material is a press release with an acceptable license, not simply used as a source, but largely copied and pasted? S Philbrick (Talk) 12:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I hope you are well. As an admin with experience on Holocaust-related content, I'd be grateful if you could intervene in a dispute at Union générale des israélites de France. I think the issue should be reasonably straightforward but I may of course be wrong. The editor involved has just left a threat on my talk page and I am keen for it not to escalate. — Brigade Piron ( talk) 08:43, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I re-added the objects clause in the Iona Institute article as it is not a mission statement. The objects clause legally restricts the activity of the company. Carrying out activities that are not included in the objects clause is know as acting ultra vires, or beyond their legal power, and those actions would be void. This is much stronger than a self-drafted mission statement or company slogan. HylandPaddy ( talk) 17:12, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
The contributions by 74.143.190.89 on Talk:Big Mac look like the work of a kid bullying another. Are they something you would normally revdel? Thanks! Dorsetonian ( talk) 18:56, 15 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, would you help resolve the grammar dispute at
Talk:Castling#has or have? I surely do appreciate! --
IHTS (
talk) 23:01, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa. I was wondering why you deleted those two quotes that I had uploaded to the rias massacre page. They were both cited and quoted by people in well credited news outlets. I was also curious as to why u only deleted this and not the other things on the page such as the first sentence stating false numbers from a cnn report that doesn't even exist anymore. Try and clicking on the external link to it and you will get a big 404 message. My quotes will stay on that page as they are first hand accounts by witnesses who were there and were willing to risk their lives to report it to Amnesty international as well as the Algerian League for the Defence of Human Rights, so the least I can do is put there voice out there and let it be heard to the world, as the people who died in this massacre were humans and had a voice. Please explain to me how they were "unsourced" as you put it as I carefully read each article and pulled these quotes out from them.
Cheers. Marcmmep2020 ( talk) 00:16, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
"A few recounts of the massacre allow us to step into the shoes of the victims and hear the appalling things that occurred on August 28, 1997.") Please see WP:NPOV. — Diannaa ( talk) 03:02, 21 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, First off, thanks for being a resource for me. I really want to do this well. This is my first article. I am trying to write something that contains and compares different points of view that don't necessarily agree and where statements are attributed to sources that can be compared. Exactly how long can a quote be? If I rewrite what someone says and then footnote it that meets copyright rules, yes? The article I found before I rewrote it seemed to simply lift whole paragraphs from other places, which from your message I assume was not the correct way to do this. I will look for anything that looks too close to the original, but I'm still a bit confused about quotes. MinorDetailer2 ( talk) 17:20, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Just wanted to reach out about the Himmler voice recording. I do agree that the sourcing is lacking but through listening to other voice recordings of him both on here and youtube its quite obvious its him. But, if you wish I can get another recording on Commons, it might be poorer quality though. ✠ Robertus Pius ✠ ( Talk • Contribs) 00:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello! Why did you remove the quotes on Parumala Thirumeni? It was difficult for me to add them, and now it seems very easy for others to remove them without any second thought. Lovekindman ( talk) 07:56, 24 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, quick question. The Algemeiner appears to be copying without attribution large parts of an AFP story, modifying a few words and adding a few others. But mostly a word for word copy. Would this be a copyright violation and if so should it linked to from an article? The article is 2023 Nablus attack. nableezy - 09:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Good evening. There is not any copyright mark at https://research-management.mq.edu.au/ws/portalfiles/portal/cv/fcb42347-1676-49cb-9c81-bcd6b29af04e?locale=en_GB. The information contained at that address is not an authored work by its nature, so it is not neither intrinsically protected as a copyrighted work. But you have cloth and scissors. It is pointless to discuss with bureaucratic authority.
However, I take the liberty of noting that, even in this context, threats are out of place. Why do you threaten me with the banning? Should I lose earnings, power, or whatever? I invest some knowledge, time and will to enrich the content of Wikipedia in several languages. Where I can, I fix. I don't threaten, I don't insult. Your tone (not the remark, but the harsh tone) suggests to me that I am unnecessary, a nuisance.
With best regards, --23:39, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Inoslav Bešker ( talk) 23:39, 26 March 2023 (UTC)
Greetings from that pest again. Could you check out this article? It is heavily copied from The Jewish Encyclopedia, which it claims is in the public domain, but I noticed a copyright notice at the bottom of this page. So my question, PD or not? Thanks as always. Onel5969 TT me 11:54, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Hey Dianna, I was wondering if there are any other tools that you use for detecting copy-pastes aside from the obvious one. For example, the wholesale copypasting of up to 300 words at a time into direct pullquotes on this page has got to be a copyright violation, surely? But on the copyvio detector it turns up nada, I'm thinking because the sources must not be digitalized yet. Iskandar323 ( talk) 11:16, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Can you please review article Battle of Kup as it seems like the content is directly plagiarized from the sources? The edit was made by an IP 2409:40D6:101F:634F:8000:0:0:0 This IP does have block on it now. Javerine ( talk) 13:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi! This is about Draft:Fall 2023 fashion weeks - I had quotations from the guardian removed, but I had only pulled them because I was trying to figure out how to best write a paragraph about the trends at Paris fashion week that included the opinions of the Guardian writer. I didn't realized that Drafts could just have things removed from them - should I put stuff like that in my sandbox when I'm working instead? Should I create all articles in the sandbox in order to avoid this? Thanks Computer-ergonomics ( talk) 21:38, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa, I thought perhaps you should be aware of this. Cheers! Chanaka L ( talk) 12:14, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
dear diana,
you claim that the references are irrelevant but they are. please undo the deletion of the paragraph! Amani rosan ( talk) 12:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
You marked List of Champion Trees (South Africa) as a potential copyright violation. I've reviewed and placed my analysis at Talk:List of Champion Trees (South Africa)#Copyright issue for "Designated Champion Trees". In short, I believe the material is PD as claimed. Can you have a look and let me know if I have missed something in my analysis? -- Whpq ( talk) 13:53, 1 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa. I am responding to your reversion of my edit to Rudolf Hess. I am not sure why any edit that adds information about the subject of a biography and that is well sourced can be ruled "off topic." The edit well illustrates Hitler's intent, in the early days of his regime, to seize more control over the levers of government by interlinking his trusted Party leadership with the government. By placing his Deputy Führer in the cabinet, he was sending a strong message. If you think re-phrasing could help clarify the point, please feel free to do so, but I believe the main point is germane and should be retained. Please reconsider your reversion in light of these comments. Respectfully, Historybuff0105 ( talk) 12:57, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
my story today |
I saw you giving an "awesome" award, and liked it. 11 years for you, DYK? - Do you think Martinevans123 could be unblocked on some kind of try-out or supervision scheme? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:55, 11 April 2023 (UTC)
I added the source of Klaus Höss birth date and death date in the Rudolph Höss document, but the document was messed up. I don't know how to modify it, so I'd appreciate it if you could modify it. 망고소녀 ( talk) 01:26, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
I think this editor is NOTHERE. Take a look at their talk page comments on Talk:Adolf Hitler and Talk:Mein Kampf. Beyond My Ken ( talk) 23:12, 12 April 2023 (UTC)
No, I did not completely copy it. Oddballslover ( talk) 01:12, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for helping users to improve their articles in a friendly environment. Ngsharif ( talk) 01:54, 17 April 2023 (UTC)
Hiu all. There's been a very large number of cases posted at CopyPatrol in the last 24 hours; I can't possibly look ater them all. Any help appreciated! Pinging some recent participants: DanCherek, L3X1, Ymblanter, 1AmNobody24, Sphilbrick. Thanks! — Diannaa ( talk) 01:54, 18 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi. Just want to make sure I'm interpreting something correctly regarding copyvio. This article has a large section which is a very close paraphrase from this source. Now the source isn't a .gov, and has a copyright marker on it. But the source appears to be copying from a .gov site. Am I incorrect in thinking that this is not a copyvio.
Also, I didn't see your post directly above. Remember that I don't do it regularly, but if you get a backlog like, feel free to ping me as well. Onel5969 TT me 13:51, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
See thread: WP:RSN#Policy violation to link to WikiLeaks
Maybe I'm misunderstanding our policies, so I'd appreciate your feedback. WikiLeaks hosts lots of illegally obtained content, and I believe we are not allowed to link to such URLs. -- Valjean ( talk) ( PING me) 22:39, 19 April 2023 (UTC)
Hey, I noticed you reverted my edit. I get that this "sockpuppet" did make the article better while evading a block, so how about we can rewrite the article in a way we could rewrite it to better fit format but not exactly copying that sock revision. That way, the revision isn't evading a sanction while format is also met? Do you agree? I think that would be better. Pessi69 ( talk) 22:24, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
Pessi69 ( talk) 01:14, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for catching the copyright violation on Temple of Athena Nike. I thought I ought to let you know that the material still exists on wiki at User:Twospoonfuls/sandbox/8. (and User:Twospoonfuls/sandbox/11 appears to be a copyvio from [2]). I mentioned this on the user in question's talk page, but they've blanked the page (as I suppose is their right), so I thought it best to bring this to you directly. Furius ( talk) 19:23, 22 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello
A) I am pretty sure those other revisions of the article The Poem of the Man-God also contain some copyright infringement: [3], [4]. Could you check those? Also, it is very likely that other older revisions of this article also contain a copyright infringement, juging by the fact you only left the versions with my removal visible and that I only made those changes on 22 April 2023.
B) In my removal of unreliable sources I did on 22 April 2023, I first removed the sourced, and only after (in following edits) did I remove the information they supported. This was likely a bad idea as I did not think the now-unsourced paragraphs could be close paraphrasings.
My bad, I should have known better!
C) Could you check this month's revisions of Maria Valtorta for copyright?
I suspect the user who expanded The Poem of the Man-God (Arkenstrone) might be the cause of the copyright problem, and this user has also expanded Maria Valtorta recently. Veverve ( talk) 21:22, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Hello Diannaa,
I noticed that you made some edits to this page, which looks like it prevents me from restoring a previous version of the article. Am I mistaken? A new editor has made some radical changes gutting the article in question, removing important factual information in order to maintain his own POV.
I don't actually have a problem with contrary POVs, as long as it's backed up by sources. But the same must be true in the other direction as well. The edits I've made in recent months add important factual information that was previously missing, which create a wrong understanding regarding the article (for example, there was no mention that the books were removed from the Index of Prohibited Books in 1962, which is crucially important information).
In any case, I've been working to improve the article, and those edits were not contested when I finished those edits many weeks/months ago. I have asked the editor in question to leave the article as it is for now, and we can discuss each point sequentally on the article talk page and come to resolution.
I've left a note to his first note on the article talk page explaining why the sources are adequate. But if he disagrees, we can address that by finding better sources, instead of gutting the article and removing 30%+ of the content. At the very least, placing a "better citation needed" tag could alert me and others to find better sources (if they are indeed required). This editor's approach by removing large portions of the article because he doesn't like the sources, is extremely disruptive. And if there are any copyright policy violations, then please bring them up, and I'll correct.
Please consider restoring the last version of the article, where we can then go through each point and resolve them one by one. That should be the starting point since the article has already stood for some months now uncontested. Arkenstrone ( talk) 21:37, 23 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi. Could you review this request on my talk page. Your opinion whether it constitutes a copyright violation would be appreciated. -- Whpq ( talk) 01:40, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Hi,
You marked a recent addition to the Christendom College wikipedia as a copyright violation since the text was taken from the college's website. This is publicly accessible information and I've been given permission from the college to post it on Wikipedia. Is there anything else I need to do to be able to add this info to the Wikipedia page? Thanks! FlyPeterPan87 ( talk) 20:32, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Just figured I'd let you know that Bulbapedia is completely separate from Fandom. Doesn't matter too much since Bulbapedia is still a fan wiki. ― Blaze Wolf TalkBlaze Wolf#6545 20:35, 27 April 2023 (UTC)
Meh. Only 903 to go. (sigh) -- Deepfriedokra ( talk) 01:18, 28 April 2023 (UTC)