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 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Has something gone wrong here? I didn't see Derek's last version, but the previous version (the copyvio one) contained (as well as Derek's original text) substantial sections of text and references that I had contributed. Those sections seem now all to have disappeared along with Derek's text and are inaccessible (at least to me). If the issue is that Derek's last revised version still has copyvio problems (which doesn't seem to have been stated anywhere), could you at least make that available somewhere to be worked on further - otherwise we will have to start from scratch for the third time. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 19:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.
A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;
Hi. I think my choice of SCV template may have led you to miss my decision to blank - rather than delete - the above article to allow the AfD to run its course (given that it was heading to delete on notability grounds) to establish a binding consensus. I relisted it at CP for 17th and left a note at the aforementioned AfD discussion. As I say, my choice of note at the SCV listing for the 10th was not clear - this is just an FYI should you come across a similar assessment of mine in the future, it is a decision not to speedy rather than indecision on my part. Best, – Toon 19:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello--
I caught your BLP noticeboard post regarding Sarath N. Silva and wanted to let you know I'm working on a standard hackjob on it beyond your work earlier toady. A few very generic sources will support at least the basics, which by themselves are entirely notable. The only more particularly bold thing done was removing the external links section as was given, as they were instead possible sources for use in the detailed sections of the article. I know this is a rather crude fix for now, but I'm of the view of it being safer to remove anything at all questionable up-front strictly with BLPs and replace it safely later when and if verified. Cheers~ ♪ daTheisen (talk) 00:30, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing out that The Wordsmith's statement was attached to the wrong case. I have moved it accordingly. Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) ( talk) 10:08, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, MLauba. Thank you for investigating the possible copyright violations in this article. As you may have noticed, the creating editor was blocked in June 2009 for repeated copyright violations, so they will be unable to rewrite it. I am going through the editor's contributions looking for copyright violations in the articles they created, something that apparently wasn't done when they were blocked. Is it appropriate to nominate blatant copyright violations for speedy deletion, or do you suggest going about it in a different manner? Best regards, momo ricks 22:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
While there seem to have been copyright violations in this article, does that justify its deletion, rather than attempting a clean-up ? RGCorris ( talk) 15:31, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
If you restore those elements, I will rework the article. RGCorris ( talk) 16:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Done There is now a stub in place of the article. Looking forward to your work. MLauba ( talk) 11:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Look what I found! (I'm updating Copyclean between CCIs this morning.) Since that's kind of your baby, mind if I leave handling those to you? :) (I may check later to see if I can get those automatically added to CP by DumbBot.) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Thx. Jheald ( talk) 16:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello. I just wanted to apologize for my mistake concerning the copyvio issue at Idiocracy. You're right - I should have discussed it on the talk page before making such a revert. Not only that, but if I had been paying attention, your edit summary would have caused me to check your user page, at which time I would have reaelized that administrator action had indeed been taken on the issue. So... my bad entirely. I do apologize. I have to say, though, that I would have appreciated a note on my talk page explaining my error rather than a block out of nowhere. Still, it was my mistake so I guess I can't complain that much. :) Also, I remember my days as an admin. We didn't have quite so many admins then as you do now, but Wikipedia is also much more popular these days. The workload on admins is probably the same or worse. I apologize for the extra effort I put you to. Well, I just wanted to apologize and let you know it won't be an issue again. I'll also be much more careful in the future concerning copyright issues. Take care, and happy editing! 152.16.59.102 ( talk) 23:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for histpurging Kiss All the Boys. The revision by User:Nopocky4kitty in this diff restored the copyvio plot summary. I missed it myself until User:Malkinann set me straight. If you're too busy to handle it now, I'll just restore the tag. Flatscan ( talk) 04:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm really sorry to burden you with all of this work at Bourla-papey, but you did ask. If it gets too much just let me know and I'll back off. My suggestions are only to help it towards GA, but I know I can sometimes be overly critical. It's already a nice article that I've learned quite a bit from. -- Malleus Fatuorum 23:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
The contributor has attempted to rewrite Six Bells Colliery Disaster from [1]. Can you take a look at this and see if you think that the text is uncreative enough to constitute a proper rewrite? I have some misgivings myself, but I'm trying to spend as much time as I can on the CCIs today. (I haven't finished the single article I've been looking at for the past two days :/, and I want to get some work done on Craigy144.) Would you have time to evaluate and address this, from Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations/2010-01-18? -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi MLauba, it's me again. :) Does public domain work by the United States federal government include written works? The reason I ask is that everything in Kathleen L. Casey appears to be copied/pasted from the subject's SEC bio page here. Thanks, momo ricks 04:58, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
User:MLauba has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, MLauba, I find sad that the article about Kolibrios was deleted but I understand the lack of notability. I wonder in this case if the deletion process could be made more accurate and make justice to the Kolibrios crew for example by deleting other OS pet projects like:
LoseThos : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LoseThos EOS : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E/OS Tinykrnl : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TinyKRNL Freedows : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedows_OS Reactos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactos
Best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by JPLeRouzic ( talk • contribs) 18:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks MLauba, now I see you didn't removed Kolibrios page. This whole thing is quite upseting, Wikipedia gets too complex for me. I am not sure Reactos is more notable than Kolibrios. If you want to write an encyclopedia, the noise generated by 3 or 4 fans submitting mostly to OSNEWS Website can't count as 3rd parties assertion of notability. Anyway sorry to have bothered you as you were not involved in it. Jean-Pierre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JPLeRouzic ( talk • contribs) 22:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest you temporarily undo your move of this. The request was the editor's fifth edit ever on the English Wikipedia, especially considering the fact it was deleted via AFD once, and then speedied.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙) 00:41, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for indef blocking that guy. I was about to open an WP:AN thread asking for a ban. He has gone to extreme measures to deny access to his materials: denying HTTP referrers from Wikipedia, denying archive.org access, sending opt-out notices to WebCite, etc. He is entirely entitled to do all that, but he's obviously not here to contribute to Wikipedia anymore. By the way, several Australian IPs (Hutch's home country) have been trolling Talk:Open Watcom Assembler, and removing talk page comments. They should probably be blocked per WP:DUCK. See also [2]. Pcap ping 12:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Können Sie mir helfen? Ich bin gebeten worden, um die Übersetzung eines deutschen Artikels zu überdenken, und mein Deutsch ist nicht sehr gut. Ich würde mich freuen Ihre Hilfe. Bitte, sehen Sie User talk:Moonriddengirl#Ida Raming and Gisela Forsterdiese. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to recreate the page for "Managed digital allowance" that you recently deleted. The language used was not in violation of copyright, but it can be changed if there is a problem. Can you give me some guidance on how I can do this? I'll follow on your talk page. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.209.139 ( talk) 01:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I linked one of my pages to that page in the midst of the copyright violation resolution.
It was not a big page, so I am thinking that maybe sometime I might try writing it properly.
I am wondering now whether in a copyright violation case if the source material gets documented somewhere.
Let's say 6 months from now, I want to know where that copyrighted text came from.
Will I be able to look that up then?
I am not familiar with that case except for that short WP article.
Curious,
Varlaam (
talk) 16:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help){{
cite news}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)Second copyright issue, since I have you "on the phone".
More than once, I have seen an IMDb plot appear here verbatim and uncited.
How bad is that? Is there a special agreement with the IMDb that allows copying with citation or something?
At one time, a decade ago, I was an acknowledged major data contributor to the IMDb, and I also happen to have 100+ plot summaries over there. I'm not sure how I would feel if those popped up here uncited. I have more than once seen unique and very individual contributions of mine to the IMDb appear on commerical DVDs as common ordinary facts, and that is a very weird thing when that happens.
Actually, since I see you speak German, my personal title for an early Franka Potente movie seems to have acquired some sort of official status.
Varlaam (
talk) 16:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) Just like to note that Wikipedia plot summaries occasionally also turn up at the IMDb, uncited. For this reason it's important to check who's copied who before removing it from the article. Of course, IMDb are free to use plot summaries from here as long as it's properly attributed. An URI to our article and to the license text should do, and it's easy to add if you have an account there. decltype ( talk) 17:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Copied over to my page.
Thanks again,
Varlaam (
talk) 18:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Ok, calm down! I get the point, and I won't repeat it again. So if you copypaste any sorts of info within wikipedia you have to just say in the edit summary "copy pasted some content from ....". Anyway, since I only found this out around early January, and thought (until now) that it wasn't obligatory, what do I do about many edits in the past from which I have copypasted withing wikipedia. I've made mistakes, but I won't repeat it. Do you have to attribute even if you only copy paste info from the past (i.e. an old version of an article). Just reply and help me out here, since I'm starting to get confused!-- Theologiae ( talk) 14:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello MLauba,
'The Inevitable Flight' is a documentary film that my husband both produced and anchored, and all the information on the page that was deleted came from his website. Copyright infringement was the reason stated. But I have full permission by my husband to reuse content from his website. Besides, I still have a lot more that I would like to still add on there.
Hairhorn send me an advisory before you deleted my page. It states that I was to explain having the owner's permission to reuse content on The Inevitable Flight's talk page as well as send an email to Wikipedia permissions. I have done that. Please let me know what else I can to get my page back up. As well, what measures can I take differently to avoid this problem next time.
There is a contact page on my husband's website where you can send in an enquiry to verify my claims.
Thank you!
Sincerely yours.
EssRiz ( talk) 11:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi. :) There's one incomplete at SCV for the 25th, which is the only open ticket for SCV and CP that day: Colette Rossant. I would appreciate another review on that one, in comparing it to [3]. If you think it's good enough, the day can be cleared from both Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations and Wikipedia:Copyright problems. There are also two rewrites awaiting checking at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 February 24, if you don't mind.
Meanwhile, Tbsdy lives continues to be fairly inactive, so I do not know when he will be available to help close out the 21st. I'll keep an eye on it. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
If you're wondering why I'm clogging up your watchlist, it's because I accidentally used mass-rollback on your contribs page. My humble apologies. I've reverted myself, so all should be back to normal. – Toon 17:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
To Whom It May Concern,
We would like to inform you that the JMM page was deleted two (2) weeks ago because of the link that has been added not knowing that it was unacceptable for the same contents of the main page.
In line thereof, the deletion made us discouraged and sad since our University was aware of the publishing and for a shortwhile it was deleted.
We would like to request for the re publishing of the page again for our University not mentioning our students, staff and administration.
Your kind consideration and favourable response are highy appreciated.
Thank You.
Ms. Najmah 06:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)06:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Najmahtamano ( talk • contribs)
Hi Mlauba: Thank you for your attention. Because of not being seconded within 48 hours by another user, you recently deleted three RfCs created by User:Newman Luke at:
However, when User:Newman Luke created those three RfC proposals, now deleted by you, he did so by REDIRECTING the content from:
from three earlier trial "RfCs" that were there for over a week at:
that should now also be deleted per the 48 hour requirement that was not met.
BOTH the 3 REDIRECT pages PLUS the 3 TRIAL RfC pages should now also be deleted. Meaning ALL the above should be deleted now that the 3 final OFFICIAL RfCs have been deleted by you. Thank you in advance for clearing up the loose ends of this matter. Sincerely, IZAK ( talk) 13:07, 10 March 2010 (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 1 | ← | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 |
Has something gone wrong here? I didn't see Derek's last version, but the previous version (the copyvio one) contained (as well as Derek's original text) substantial sections of text and references that I had contributed. Those sections seem now all to have disappeared along with Derek's text and are inaccessible (at least to me). If the issue is that Derek's last revised version still has copyvio problems (which doesn't seem to have been stated anywhere), could you at least make that available somewhere to be worked on further - otherwise we will have to start from scratch for the third time. Ghmyrtle ( talk) 19:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:01, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.
A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;
Hi. I think my choice of SCV template may have led you to miss my decision to blank - rather than delete - the above article to allow the AfD to run its course (given that it was heading to delete on notability grounds) to establish a binding consensus. I relisted it at CP for 17th and left a note at the aforementioned AfD discussion. As I say, my choice of note at the SCV listing for the 10th was not clear - this is just an FYI should you come across a similar assessment of mine in the future, it is a decision not to speedy rather than indecision on my part. Best, – Toon 19:49, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello--
I caught your BLP noticeboard post regarding Sarath N. Silva and wanted to let you know I'm working on a standard hackjob on it beyond your work earlier toady. A few very generic sources will support at least the basics, which by themselves are entirely notable. The only more particularly bold thing done was removing the external links section as was given, as they were instead possible sources for use in the detailed sections of the article. I know this is a rather crude fix for now, but I'm of the view of it being safer to remove anything at all questionable up-front strictly with BLPs and replace it safely later when and if verified. Cheers~ ♪ daTheisen (talk) 00:30, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing out that The Wordsmith's statement was attached to the wrong case. I have moved it accordingly. Regards -- Александр Дмитрий (Alexandr Dmitri) ( talk) 10:08, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, MLauba. Thank you for investigating the possible copyright violations in this article. As you may have noticed, the creating editor was blocked in June 2009 for repeated copyright violations, so they will be unable to rewrite it. I am going through the editor's contributions looking for copyright violations in the articles they created, something that apparently wasn't done when they were blocked. Is it appropriate to nominate blatant copyright violations for speedy deletion, or do you suggest going about it in a different manner? Best regards, momo ricks 22:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
While there seem to have been copyright violations in this article, does that justify its deletion, rather than attempting a clean-up ? RGCorris ( talk) 15:31, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
If you restore those elements, I will rework the article. RGCorris ( talk) 16:06, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
Done There is now a stub in place of the article. Looking forward to your work. MLauba ( talk) 11:24, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Look what I found! (I'm updating Copyclean between CCIs this morning.) Since that's kind of your baby, mind if I leave handling those to you? :) (I may check later to see if I can get those automatically added to CP by DumbBot.) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:21, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Thx. Jheald ( talk) 16:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello. I just wanted to apologize for my mistake concerning the copyvio issue at Idiocracy. You're right - I should have discussed it on the talk page before making such a revert. Not only that, but if I had been paying attention, your edit summary would have caused me to check your user page, at which time I would have reaelized that administrator action had indeed been taken on the issue. So... my bad entirely. I do apologize. I have to say, though, that I would have appreciated a note on my talk page explaining my error rather than a block out of nowhere. Still, it was my mistake so I guess I can't complain that much. :) Also, I remember my days as an admin. We didn't have quite so many admins then as you do now, but Wikipedia is also much more popular these days. The workload on admins is probably the same or worse. I apologize for the extra effort I put you to. Well, I just wanted to apologize and let you know it won't be an issue again. I'll also be much more careful in the future concerning copyright issues. Take care, and happy editing! 152.16.59.102 ( talk) 23:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks for histpurging Kiss All the Boys. The revision by User:Nopocky4kitty in this diff restored the copyvio plot summary. I missed it myself until User:Malkinann set me straight. If you're too busy to handle it now, I'll just restore the tag. Flatscan ( talk) 04:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm really sorry to burden you with all of this work at Bourla-papey, but you did ask. If it gets too much just let me know and I'll back off. My suggestions are only to help it towards GA, but I know I can sometimes be overly critical. It's already a nice article that I've learned quite a bit from. -- Malleus Fatuorum 23:23, 25 January 2010 (UTC)
The contributor has attempted to rewrite Six Bells Colliery Disaster from [1]. Can you take a look at this and see if you think that the text is uncreative enough to constitute a proper rewrite? I have some misgivings myself, but I'm trying to spend as much time as I can on the CCIs today. (I haven't finished the single article I've been looking at for the past two days :/, and I want to get some work done on Craigy144.) Would you have time to evaluate and address this, from Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations/2010-01-18? -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:26, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi MLauba, it's me again. :) Does public domain work by the United States federal government include written works? The reason I ask is that everything in Kathleen L. Casey appears to be copied/pasted from the subject's SEC bio page here. Thanks, momo ricks 04:58, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
User:MLauba has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, Peace, A record of your Day will always be kept here. |
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:00, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello, MLauba, I find sad that the article about Kolibrios was deleted but I understand the lack of notability. I wonder in this case if the deletion process could be made more accurate and make justice to the Kolibrios crew for example by deleting other OS pet projects like:
LoseThos : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LoseThos EOS : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E/OS Tinykrnl : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TinyKRNL Freedows : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedows_OS Reactos: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reactos
Best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by JPLeRouzic ( talk • contribs) 18:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks MLauba, now I see you didn't removed Kolibrios page. This whole thing is quite upseting, Wikipedia gets too complex for me. I am not sure Reactos is more notable than Kolibrios. If you want to write an encyclopedia, the noise generated by 3 or 4 fans submitting mostly to OSNEWS Website can't count as 3rd parties assertion of notability. Anyway sorry to have bothered you as you were not involved in it. Jean-Pierre. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JPLeRouzic ( talk • contribs) 22:11, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I would suggest you temporarily undo your move of this. The request was the editor's fifth edit ever on the English Wikipedia, especially considering the fact it was deleted via AFD once, and then speedied.— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙) 00:41, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for indef blocking that guy. I was about to open an WP:AN thread asking for a ban. He has gone to extreme measures to deny access to his materials: denying HTTP referrers from Wikipedia, denying archive.org access, sending opt-out notices to WebCite, etc. He is entirely entitled to do all that, but he's obviously not here to contribute to Wikipedia anymore. By the way, several Australian IPs (Hutch's home country) have been trolling Talk:Open Watcom Assembler, and removing talk page comments. They should probably be blocked per WP:DUCK. See also [2]. Pcap ping 12:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Können Sie mir helfen? Ich bin gebeten worden, um die Übersetzung eines deutschen Artikels zu überdenken, und mein Deutsch ist nicht sehr gut. Ich würde mich freuen Ihre Hilfe. Bitte, sehen Sie User talk:Moonriddengirl#Ida Raming and Gisela Forsterdiese. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to recreate the page for "Managed digital allowance" that you recently deleted. The language used was not in violation of copyright, but it can be changed if there is a problem. Can you give me some guidance on how I can do this? I'll follow on your talk page. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.21.209.139 ( talk) 01:50, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I linked one of my pages to that page in the midst of the copyright violation resolution.
It was not a big page, so I am thinking that maybe sometime I might try writing it properly.
I am wondering now whether in a copyright violation case if the source material gets documented somewhere.
Let's say 6 months from now, I want to know where that copyrighted text came from.
Will I be able to look that up then?
I am not familiar with that case except for that short WP article.
Curious,
Varlaam (
talk) 16:00, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite news}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help){{
cite news}}
: Cite has empty unknown parameter: |coauthors=
(
help)Second copyright issue, since I have you "on the phone".
More than once, I have seen an IMDb plot appear here verbatim and uncited.
How bad is that? Is there a special agreement with the IMDb that allows copying with citation or something?
At one time, a decade ago, I was an acknowledged major data contributor to the IMDb, and I also happen to have 100+ plot summaries over there. I'm not sure how I would feel if those popped up here uncited. I have more than once seen unique and very individual contributions of mine to the IMDb appear on commerical DVDs as common ordinary facts, and that is a very weird thing when that happens.
Actually, since I see you speak German, my personal title for an early Franka Potente movie seems to have acquired some sort of official status.
Varlaam (
talk) 16:40, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) Just like to note that Wikipedia plot summaries occasionally also turn up at the IMDb, uncited. For this reason it's important to check who's copied who before removing it from the article. Of course, IMDb are free to use plot summaries from here as long as it's properly attributed. An URI to our article and to the license text should do, and it's easy to add if you have an account there. decltype ( talk) 17:51, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Copied over to my page.
Thanks again,
Varlaam (
talk) 18:34, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Ok, calm down! I get the point, and I won't repeat it again. So if you copypaste any sorts of info within wikipedia you have to just say in the edit summary "copy pasted some content from ....". Anyway, since I only found this out around early January, and thought (until now) that it wasn't obligatory, what do I do about many edits in the past from which I have copypasted withing wikipedia. I've made mistakes, but I won't repeat it. Do you have to attribute even if you only copy paste info from the past (i.e. an old version of an article). Just reply and help me out here, since I'm starting to get confused!-- Theologiae ( talk) 14:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:21, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello MLauba,
'The Inevitable Flight' is a documentary film that my husband both produced and anchored, and all the information on the page that was deleted came from his website. Copyright infringement was the reason stated. But I have full permission by my husband to reuse content from his website. Besides, I still have a lot more that I would like to still add on there.
Hairhorn send me an advisory before you deleted my page. It states that I was to explain having the owner's permission to reuse content on The Inevitable Flight's talk page as well as send an email to Wikipedia permissions. I have done that. Please let me know what else I can to get my page back up. As well, what measures can I take differently to avoid this problem next time.
There is a contact page on my husband's website where you can send in an enquiry to verify my claims.
Thank you!
Sincerely yours.
EssRiz ( talk) 11:10, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi. :) There's one incomplete at SCV for the 25th, which is the only open ticket for SCV and CP that day: Colette Rossant. I would appreciate another review on that one, in comparing it to [3]. If you think it's good enough, the day can be cleared from both Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations and Wikipedia:Copyright problems. There are also two rewrites awaiting checking at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 February 24, if you don't mind.
Meanwhile, Tbsdy lives continues to be fairly inactive, so I do not know when he will be available to help close out the 21st. I'll keep an eye on it. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
If you're wondering why I'm clogging up your watchlist, it's because I accidentally used mass-rollback on your contribs page. My humble apologies. I've reverted myself, so all should be back to normal. – Toon 17:13, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
To Whom It May Concern,
We would like to inform you that the JMM page was deleted two (2) weeks ago because of the link that has been added not knowing that it was unacceptable for the same contents of the main page.
In line thereof, the deletion made us discouraged and sad since our University was aware of the publishing and for a shortwhile it was deleted.
We would like to request for the re publishing of the page again for our University not mentioning our students, staff and administration.
Your kind consideration and favourable response are highy appreciated.
Thank You.
Ms. Najmah 06:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)06:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Najmahtamano ( talk • contribs)
Hi Mlauba: Thank you for your attention. Because of not being seconded within 48 hours by another user, you recently deleted three RfCs created by User:Newman Luke at:
However, when User:Newman Luke created those three RfC proposals, now deleted by you, he did so by REDIRECTING the content from:
from three earlier trial "RfCs" that were there for over a week at:
that should now also be deleted per the 48 hour requirement that was not met.
BOTH the 3 REDIRECT pages PLUS the 3 TRIAL RfC pages should now also be deleted. Meaning ALL the above should be deleted now that the 3 final OFFICIAL RfCs have been deleted by you. Thank you in advance for clearing up the loose ends of this matter. Sincerely, IZAK ( talk) 13:07, 10 March 2010 (UTC)