![]() | 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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
Hi Moonriddengirl, I was amazed and bit furious to found out that one of my user pages, User:Chanakal/My Contributions is hosted here. Seems to be they are using a web frame. I immediately added userpage template to the page. Felt like my privacy being abused. Don't know whether you are the correct person to report this. Nevertheless hope you'll help me. Cheers! Chanaka L ( talk) 09:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the great work and diligence on determining copyright issues on the Billboard year-end Hot 100 charts. I'm glad we've got something to go by now. -- Wolfer68 ( talk) 17:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I am the user HendrixMorisson who was added the article Arthur Sarkissian. You was deleted it please tell me why? i have add that article 5 times and now my user is blocked! Arthur Sarkissian article is about painter Arthur Sarkissian. and it's my father why i cnat add it? and what copyright i need? PLEASEEEEEEEEE tell me what can i do and how you can help me?? THX!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vahansarkissian ( talk • contribs)
Hope you have a pleasant break from Wiki. When you get back into the flow, please review User:Mgreason/Sandbox 3. Thanks! Mgreason ( talk) 18:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello, wikpedia is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License. It does mean that I can add texts under CC-BY-SA-3.0 or under CC-BY-3.0. Am I right?
Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials states, that I can add also texts under CC-BY-SA-compatible licenses.
What are these CC-BY-SA-compatible licenses? Are these all licenses: CC-BY-SA-1.0, CC-BY-1.0, CC-BY-SA-2.0, CC-BY-2.0?
Creative Commons webpage does not provide any Creative commons licenses [3] and does not provide any additional information.
CC-BY-2.0 [4] says that "No works are automatically put under the new license" and the same says CC-BY-1.0 license.
There is directly in Creative Commons licenses article used text licensed under CC-BY-1.0: "Portions of this article are taken from the Creative Commons website, published under the Creative Commons Attribution License v1.0." Is it OK or not?
I would like to be sure if may I or may I not add text under CC-BY-2.0 to wikipedia? Thanks. -- Snek01 ( talk) 11:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Please see my comment here; I'd appreciate your input. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I will provide the required response that will include a specified text associated with the copyright permission. Bci2Nu 05:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)Bci2( talk).
![]() |
Welcome back |
Glad you're back! Hope your time off was restful and invigorating, in whatever proportion best suits you. – Quadell ( talk) 00:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC) |
Hi, do you think you could take a look at this issue which I reported to ANI? No one seems to be interested :\ -- aktsu ( t&nbs]p;/ c) 17:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Need a vacation after the vacation? A good sign, but no good graphic AFAIK.
Question, is this being appropriately handled? Talk:Silesian_Uprisings#Copyright_violations. On June 24th the editor stated some possible understanding with the author, but it has not since been confirmed at the page. No hurry?
Also, do you know of any in-house copyvio tool development, apart from the new article bot? Novickas ( talk) 19:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Glad to see that you did remember and found some time. Nice. Might have to check that one out. I, on the other hand, am out of here for the next month while traveling. So I'm afraid that I won't be providing much of a regular assist for you and once again you are on your lonesome. (As if you aren't used to that.) Sorry 'bout that. I'll be back at the end of July. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 07:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Sorry to bother you, but I'm still having troubles getting the VT iDirect page created. I re-created it today based on the long list of comments I received, but it was deleted by ERK while I was still working on it. Can you help me get the page put back up or let me know what I'm doing wrong?
Thank you!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Photoguy11579 ( talk • contribs) 14:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi again. I read your comments back to me; thank you. I've reworked portions of the article to make them neutral by taking out phrases like 'its a good company... provides a good service'. I've also linked it to another Wiki article and added several new, independent sources/resources/links. Does it now pass the requirements it needs to be listed as VT iDirect (not my user page)? Thanks again for your help. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Photoguy11579 (
talk •
contribs)
15:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
This is still full of copyright material placed there by the author, do we just leave it or? I know you emailed him, did you use this address?: Raymond.Paterson@btopenworld.com Dougweller ( talk) 17:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I write you this message only to have some information about what else to do in order to take away the "conflict of interest" message and the message about the lack of references. I've posted more references of third party sources as asked in order to not only have one primary source. The text has also The permission for use of this work in the Wikimedia OTRS system. If there is something else I could do, I will try to do the best.
Thank you very much for your help. Best regards, -- Exeko ( talk) 20:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your answer. I'll see what I can do about that.--
Exeko (
talk)
14:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello Again, I added some new information about what you asked in the Wayne Schoenfeld article. Are they sufficient to solve our issue? Here the information that I added :
About who says that Through The Eyes Of Man Erotic is "operatic"' ...I put this information : This quote comes from an essay written about THROUGH THE EYES OF MAN by Douglas Meyer, Professor of Art and Art History at Mt. St. Mary's College in Los Angeles. By OPERATIC professor Meyer refers to the elaborate staging including scenery and costumes characteristic of Schoenfeld's carefully constructed tableau vivants . This is a style originally incorporated into Italian Opera because it was the most complete art form of the day including acting, music and elaborate art direction and costumes.
About Who says Almost Perfect is "a disturbing visual account"? Who says that these themes "are heroic and worthwhile"? Whose opinion is it that one book is poignant, another colorful? ...I put this information : These quotes and opinions were written by Donald C. Rogers who, at the time was the Vice President of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and the recipient of the special Gordon E. Sawyer OSCAR for Lifetime Achievement in the motion picture arts. After over 40 years in the movie business, Mr. Rogers was expressing that the book ALMOST PERFECT was an important work with the photography capturing the drama of a finely crafted motion picture.
I also added two other sources :
I hope this will solve the problem. Best regards,-- Exeko ( talk) 18:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
could you figure out what I did wrong? I put copyvio templates on two pages, Nlectc and National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, both copyright violations and both put up by the same user. Then I dropped the standard notification thingamajing from the template onto the user's talk page, and now there's something weird about it--another editor's signature follows it, etc. Maybe this isn't a big deal, but either way, this being your area of expertise, maybe you can wait making that sixth cup of tea for today and have a quick look? I'm going to make some coffee now. Cookie? Drmies ( talk) 20:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello dear Moonriddengirl,
I understand you've not had a lot to do (since I haven't caused much disruption the last 12 hours), so perhaps I could bother you for a moment. Please have a look at the discussion on User_talk:Drmies#Tacloban and at the copyvio template I dropped on Tacloban City (in the middle). There's a license on the website from which the stuff was copied, but I am not that clever that I know what that means. (What I do know is that copying and pasting makes for poor encyclopedic text, usually.) Could you have a look and weigh in? Thank you so much for your help, as always! Drmies ( talk) 16:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I have a question about an article you saved/constructed admist much tomfoolery a year or two back - Jon Courtney. There is a quote on that page from Drowned in Sound (an unpaid, unqualified user-reviewer named Septic Clit) which seems highly inappropriate source material. I believe it was originally included to provide a balanced opinion. While the reasoning is sound, I don't think it's right to include such a poor source, and maybe another more reliable quote making a similar point should be sought. Anyway, I tried to delete this quote, and a single-account editor, Rightphone, who has already vandalised two Courtney-related articles, reversed my deletion. Rather than get in an edit war, I posted a query on the reliable sources page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Drowned_in_Sound), which was picked up by an admin/editor Dreamguy, who said lots of the sources are unreliable, and he put a banner on the page saying so. My attempts to ask what needs to be changed have been met with silence recently, so I was wondering if I could get your opinion a) about that Drowned in Sound quote and b) about the sources on that page in general (and if the banner is justified). Thanks so much! Thedarkfourth ( talk) 16:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey, is there documentation for this script anywhere? – Quadell ( talk) 20:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi there, I noticed you were quite knowledgeable when it comes to copyright issues. I was hoping to get a recommendation from you with regards to the Richard Perry article. Per discussions with a user claiming to be working for the subject, the author apparantly gives permission for the material to be put on Wikipedia. But until this is confirmed by the author should the article be blanked as a copyvio? -- œ ™ 21:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for dealing with College of Mount St. Joseph at WP:CV. I must admit I was getting a bit lazy (or just sick of copyvio). You look like you do lots of helpful work at WP:CV, so keep up the good work! WordyGirl90 ( talk) 21:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have reverted your edit to this page, I hope you don't mind. If you recall, you "approved" the original article on the grounds of balance. You did not find anything wrong with the sources then, but you now seem to have changed your opinion., which everyone is entitled to do. Could I therefore ask that you, as a senior administrator, check the remainig sources as the page banner requests, and further delete any poorly sourced material, of which there is lots. I agree that this is a case of poorly sourced material being used to balance equally poorly sourced material, but that is the nature of this article. Rightphone ( talk) 11:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moon, I'm currently working on the Lindbergh kidnapping to move it to GA review and I had some concerns about some of the images used. If you get a chance, could you please look the images over and let me know if there are any problems. Thanks! Shinerunner ( talk) 20:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Greetings, I've had a look. Here's what I found:
Hope this helps! – Quadell ( talk) 12:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonridden, Could you take a look at my concerns at Imagination Movers? I made a post at Wikipedia_talk:Suspected_copyright_violations#Imagination_Movers, but nobody seems to really watch that page, and I know that Copyvio is one of your strong suits.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 22:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I am one of the Movers and need to understand what is happening to our Wikipedia page. Not sure what is going on but please email me - <redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.179.204.91 ( talk) 18:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, what's the next step? An administrator/trix needs to resolve the issue--do you mind? Just go ahead and delete the contents--the whole things needs to be rewritten anyway, and since the section is splitting off it will be short and sweet. Your help is much appreciated. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 15:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, MRG, I'm juggling a bunch of things and your message got dropped. You don't have to do anything more, but filing an SPI may help by getting more eyes on the case. -- Avi ( talk) 17:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
We're the Imagination Movers and were notified by fans that our Wikipage is on the fritz. Could you please explain what's going on? You can email <redacted> to let us know what we should be doing to secure our representation here.
Hello Moonriddengirl, this is Survir, and agian I need your help. There is this IP address user, who has been continuously destroying the page, List of programs broadcast by DD National. The IP address begins with 117.196. (117.196.99.3, 117.196.100.1, 117.196.101.19, 117.196.101.170, etc...). Is there any way to block this person. Besides, since you have become wiki admin (congrats), can you please help me move the following pages, Colors (India TV channel) to Colors (TV channel) as this is more appropriate, since there is no other article on wikipedia with the same name exists, & also Dill Mill Gaye to Dill Mill Gayye, the title is misspelled. I will be very thankful to you! Your wiki friend, Survir ( talk) 18:07, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I sent you an email about something I mentioned a while back. Cheers, - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 14:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Please see my comment here. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have no idea where to go to discuss whether or not sources are copyright violations or not. Could you please take a look at UN Security Council Resolution 1804? It's copied from the sources, which is a un.org page. What's the word on copyright from the UN? Are they public domain, or copyrightable? Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 02:23, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Turns out you are correct about http://www.44defense.com . The domain was registered in February 2008. The content at issue was added to the American football strategy page in June 2006 here. Good catch. ... Kenosis ( talk) 18:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
User:Allstarecho/Fuglies are not notable has been called into question as violating GFDL as most of it came from User:GlassCobra/Essays/Hotties are always notable. What do I need to do with it to attribute User:GlassCobra? - ALLST✰R▼ echo wuz here 21:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
←Ah, well, if it is deleted and recreated, it'll have to be done with care to avoid infringing on the licensing rights of other contributors to the essay. I see a few other names in history, though I don't know if their contributions rise to the level of creativity that requires attribution. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
FYI: I've tagged LAMBDA School of Music and Fine Arts with WP:CSD#G12. I couldn't find a substantive revision without copyrighted text. You had cleaned this page up a while a go, so I though I'd let you know. — C45207 | Talk 03:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Your user page has a leave me a message link. May I suggest using {{ fullurl}} for that link? There's some info about it at Wikipedia:Fullurl. The replacement code would be: <span class="plainlinksneverexpand">[{{fullurl:User_talk:Moonriddengirl|action=edit§ion=new}} <font color=blue>leave me a message</font>]</span>.— C45207 | Talk 03:35, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for creating the verify permissions template, {{ User:Moonriddengirl/vp}}! Do you know of more like it?— C45207 | Talk 03:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
You made some recent related edits to the page, thought you might want to see this. (Watching) - Dank ( push to talk) 04:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for helping out previously! It still doesn't appear Sea888 ( talk · contribs) understands the problem though, as his first edit when returning after being blocked for edit warring was inserting (diff) the line...
"Carano and Cyborg, the consensus two best female fighters in the world, will be the first women in MMA history to headline a major MMA fight card. In addition, they will fight for the first STRIKEFORCE 145-pound Female Championship.
from this press release to the Strikeforce article while replacing the perfectly fine mention of it already there (also, that they're the "consensus two best female fighters in the world" is Strikeforce hyping up the fight as it's pretty far from the truth (as described by me at WT:MMA while citing proper rankings etc., but as it's sourced (Fox Sports posted (but didn't write) a small note on it retelling the press release etc.) I don't know what do to about it). His other changes in the diff is copy-pasting the rules section from the UFC article, which shouldn't be a problem I think, and while I don't like the "Mainstream emergence"-section I don't think there's any copyvio involved. Could you take a look again? Thanks, -- aktsu ( t / c) 14:19, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi I've added back the information that wasn't objectable. Cheers. Sea888 ( talk) 08:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
G W … 18:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback on Jessie Ball duPond Fund.
I've got a different kind of new article at User:Mgreason/Sandbox 5 Please let me know what you think. Thanks! Mgreason ( talk) 04:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I did a rewrite on Dinner theater at User:Mgreason/Sandbox. When you have a few minutes, I'd appreciate a critique. Thanks for your help! Mgreason ( talk) 12:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering if you could clear something up for BreakingDawn 90210, who has a habit of uploading replacement images for articles such as Blair Waldorf and Kelly Taylor (90210). The problem is that this person's uploads use the same file name as the preexisting image, but feature completely new pictures that the original copyright, source, and rationale info doesn't apply to.
I've undone the uploads and attempted to inform this person a few times of why this is improper (in edit summaries and on their talk page now). Since then, the user has done the same thing with the Naomi Clark image. Since I don't appear to be getting through, I'd appreciate it if you could put a word in, as perhaps you can explain it more clearly. Thank you. -- James26 ( talk) 07:45, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I have started a discussion on formalizing merger edit summaries at Help talk:Merging#Edit summaries, best practice. Since you had valuable input the last time I raised this suggestion and at the related discussion WT:WikiProject International relations/Bilateral relations task force#Merge and delete, I hope you will comment. Thanks. Flatscan ( talk) 04:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, If you've a moment could you please have a look at Talk:List of Jewish Nobel prize winners. An IP (85.250.189.18) has deleted all the comments of User:Jinfo and removed the copyvio template from the article. If it were simply a matter of using Template:uw-tpv1 I wouldn't bother you, but because there is an underlying copyvio argument I would appreciate your assistance/advice before I do anything. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle ( talk) 08:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi - can you pls. explain what you did to the Saul Steinberg (business) article? I am fairly sure there was a version that could have been used between 2007 and today. By deleting not only the copyrighted materials but also the entire edit history it is difficult to say what is there and what is missing. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 13:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Check your email. You can reply here or my talk page or by email, whatever is best. Dougweller ( talk) 09:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. There's been a question raised at an FLC about "extensive quotation of copyrighted text" (from Wikipedia:Non-free content#Text) in Rumford Prize. Do you think that the usage of quotation is excessive in the list? Any information/guidance on this (at the FLC) would be much appreciated. Dabomb87 ( talk) 17:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
←I think that using this text may be a problem. But I've asked for additional review at WT:NFC and WT:C and will also ask at WT:COPYCLEAN. Since there are several lists at issue here, it would be good to develop consensus. :) I've left my initial thoughts at the above FLC, but will wait until such consensus emerges to have a say at the second. (Just because currently I'd probably be redundant. :D) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
MILHIST needs your help with yet another incident of extensive plagarism. - MBK 004 18:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in an interesting discussion at Wikipedia talk:Image use policy#File:Man Utd FC .svg. Your comments & suggestions is very much appeciated Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 18:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Was not aware of the copyright tag on Concurrent relation. I disagree that this is a violation for the following several reasons, and also make these comments: 1) the source has an error that was not included but corrected in the Wikipedia article; 2) the variable names in Wikipedia were changed to differentiate from the source names; 3) although of no consequence to this discussion, another reputable website has the "exact" word-for-word definition (true copy/paste) http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ConcurrentRelation.html; 4) a mathematical definition can not change from website to website, no more than the meaning of a word can change from website to website, there will be have to be similarities; 5) the source cites 3 references from where the definition came from, hence, not an original definition; 6) the originator of the copyright tag (user Arthur Rubin) is acting with prejudice against the best interest of Wikipedia for the following reasons: a) He has stated a general negative bias against this particular source in question, "Encyclopedia of Mathematics" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_June_27#Category:Relations; b) He and others (possibly including user Michael Hardy) have conspired to remove or rename Wikipedia article that i have created on "Relations" http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Translation_relation&action=history (this is an example of removing, with a redirect, good information from Wikipedia). The fact is that "Relations" do exist in Mathematics. There are many sources describing "Translational relation", including my own in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_June_27#Category:Relations , yet these users insist on depriving Wikipedia readers based on non-cooperative reasons; c) the edits done by these users on these related topics were done in haste with insufficient thought, as can be seen with reverts on my talk page history regarding Zermelo's Theorem/game theory. Please advise if you can. Henry Delforn ( talk) 23:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
In recognition of your excellent work in this area, I award you this much-deserved star. Great job improving the Richard Perry article too! :) œ ™ 02:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC) |
Hey there, I have a general copyright question about the project Medpedia ( http://www.medpedia.com/), it says in their licensing part of their terms page that they use the GNU Free Document License, but they don't specify which version, they only link to this page [12], so I was wondering if we could use some of their content and re-license it as cc-by-sa under the licensing clause as we did with our GFDL content? Because I was wondering that if we could it would be a great source of medical related articles and information for Wikipedia (Oh, and I was refered to you from The ed17 on IRC :) ). Thanks and All the Best, Mifter ( talk) 03:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Will you add something there about Paterson? We haven't got very far yet at all. Thanks. If you know any of the participants who haven't responded to the thread, if you could drop them a note that would be great. Dougweller ( talk) 11:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. Yeah I see that now on the talk alright, I've tagged with a cleanup-section instead. Sorry about that! Thanks! Fin © ™ 16:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your assistance with this problem. I genuinely appreciate your prompt and professional handling of the issues as they've arisen. Jinfo ( talk) 18:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanking you for your sugession, since i have floated number of Pages regaring towns and villages aroung Kanpur city in a very short time.
Most of the information were from india09.com (regarding description), fallingrain.com (regarging location and elevation), censusindia.gov.in, (regarding population) asi.nic.in (regarding Archaeological importance) and from official sites of Kanpur nagar district, Kanpur dehat district, Auraiya district and unnao district.
The description obtained from india09.com is very limited just two or three lines in any particular page. Presently it may appear i have copied them from a source. Here i would like to mention that these all pages are studs and they are just evolving as more information will be available the language will continue to change. At the same time i will try to change the style of what ever limited literature they have as suggested by you. Please further note each page have different sections and their information have been sourced from different sources as stated earlier.
I have not even tagged them as studs neither they have been catogerised nor there there is any extenal reference. It will be done.
But most have the information have been cross tallied from other websites also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramesh vyas ( talk • contribs) 17:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello from WP:WPO, where a question was raised yesterday about the synopsis for ( Macbeth (opera)). The synopsis, as well as a number of others, was originally copied (in 2005 or thereabouts) from a website called Opera Japonica). The copier ( User:Kleinzach) was in real life - and still is - Simon Holledge, the publisher of Opera Japonica and the author of the synopsis. He's on a wikibreak at the moment.
At the time (November 2005), one of the other synopses (that for I Capuleti e i Montecchi) was spotted as a copyvio, and there was some dialogue between Kleinzach and two or three admins which resulted in Kleinzach attaching a statement to that synopsis (and to the other ones that he'd authored and copied) stating that the copying had been done "with permission". The permission was, of course, granted by himself as author and publisher to himself as WP editor. There is an unnumbered OTRS tag attached to the Capuleti/Montecchi Talk page, but not, we think, to any of the others, and it looks as if WP procedures weren't properly followed by OTRS people at the time. We at the Opera Project are concerned that copyvio tags may be slapped without warning on any or all of the synopses, and we'd like to regularise the situation, preferably with the aid of numbered OTRS tags or whatever else may be deemed necessary. I'm about to move the "with permission" statements from the bottom of the synopses to footnotes, but that won't solve the problem.
We will be grateful for your input on this. The discussion that we've had at the Opera Project is here. Feel free to reply direct to me and/or, if you think it's appropriate, add your thoughts to the discussion on the above page. Meanwhile, I'm emailing Kleinzach to put him in the picture. Thanks in advance for any help or guidance that you can give us. -- Guillaume Tell 21:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
A person with the user name The Younger removed text and sources, claiming that he "tidied up the article, edited some apparantly biased language". He replaced the sources with Citation needed tags. I restored the original version and reapplied a couple of valid changes he had made. Today he revised a paragraph, gutting most of the factual detail from the sources. I don't want to get into an edit war, but it seems like this person has an ax to grind. I value your opinion. Would you review this and tell me if I should back off? Mgreason ( talk) 23:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
FYI. - Dank ( push to talk) 03:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for note, and the kind words. And thanks, too, for (as always) doing such a great job in your role as admin and investigating the matter. I'll be sure to keep what you posted at the talk page in mind (that starting out different at Wikipedia and converging might signal a reverse coypvio). TwilligToves ( talk) 03:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/jewish-nobel-laureates-11590-more-than-population-statistics-might-expect/ Jewish Nobel Laureates: 11590% More Than Population Statistics Might Expect By Scott Thong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 13:05, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Invisible Barnstar | |
I hereby award you the Invisible Barnstar for your diligent work on the English Wikipedia. I had only recently become aware of you when you helped me with the article Deep Eddy Pool. Thank you so much for collaborating on such a worthy project as the wikipedia. People like you assure that when I encounter a person that doesn’t use the wikipedia because of factual verifiability, I can show them, no look, it is referenced! Dillard 421♂♂ ( talk to me) 15:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC) |
Also :)...
Dillard 421♂♂ ( talk to me) 15:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Call me slow, MRG, by all means, but...when I come across a copyvio article and think, "the author really needs to send through an OTRS notification of ownership of copyright, since most likely the author owns the copyright", I stumble around blindly looking for a page of explanation to which to direct the author. Wikipedia:OTRS does not seem a suitable place to send someone. Worse, exactly how do you send an OTRS email to the WMF? The Wikipedia:OTRS advises "Please see our "Contact Us" page". But that page does list an obvious contact email.
Forgive me laying this on you, but do you have any knowledge of the advice & contact pages you'd point a user towards in this circumstance? thanks, -- Tagishsimon (talk) 11:07, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I'm contacting you as the admin who protected the page Frank Lapidus to ask if you would consider unprotecting it. Although the article was deleted for non-notability, I believe the version that existed at the time was entirely unsourced and a clear copyvio. I've written an article on the character in my userspace utilising reliable sources which I believe should meet the general notability guideline, and would like to move it into the mainspace if at all possible. Thank you :) Frickative 14:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I think there are at least a few, if not more, copyvios at the article Expulsion of Germans after World War II. The first set of them occur in the section "Evacuation and flight to Denmark" - where a lot the text is taken almost verbatim from the Spiegel Online article [13]. For example Wiki-Article: "the refugees were interned in hundreds of camps from Copenhagen to Jutland, placed behind barbed wire and guarded by military personnel. The largest camp, located in Oksbøl on the west coast of Jutland, held 37,000 refugees." vs. Spiegel: "The refugees were interned in hundreds of camps from Copenhagen to Jutland, placed behind barbed wire and guarded by heavily armed overseers. The largest camp was located in Oksboll, on the west coast of Jutland, and had 37,000 detainees.". Or Wiki-Article: "Many of the refugees were women, children, or the elderly.[22] A third of the refugees were younger than 15 years old" vs. Spiegel: "And most were women, children or elderly. A third of the refugees were younger than 15 years old". Most of the rest of the sentences in this section are also more or less verbatim. The second batch of copyvio's appears in the "Poland" [14] section where the sentences reffed to the Gibney and Hansen book [15] are also verbatim, more or less. There might also be some based on the source The Expulsion of 'German' Communities from Eastern Europe at the end of the Second World War by Prausser and Rees but I haven't had time to check everything in that one carefully.
The same problem (with the Gibney and Hansen book) appears also in Flight and expulsion of Germans from Poland during and after World War II.
I'm not sure what the proper steps are if the article has possible multiple copyright issues. Should it be tagged with a template? radek ( talk) 01:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I FOUND ANOTHER 15 WEBSITES,WITH THE SAME INFORMATOIN BY GOOGLE SEARCH.-- 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 07:41, 10 July 2009 (UTC) ARE THEY ALL CRIMINALS ,AND ONLY WIKIPEDIA OBEYS THE LAW OF COPYRIGHT???-- 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 07:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
ALL THE 15 WEBSITES, AGREES ABOUT 160 WINNERS,AND THE FEW THAT LEFT (19 WINNERS), CAN BE EASILLY,DETECTED IF THEY ARE JEWS (BY GOOGLE SEARCH),SO ALL THE INFORMATION IS MINE,AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JINFO.ORG. -- 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 18:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
-- 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 18:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Could you enlighten us? =) P.S. Love the user talk:MRG. Much easy to get to you and bug you with stuff like this <evil grin> – xeno talk 18:58, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi I've had an editor now that has continued to harrass my talk page after numerous attempts to communicate there are still problems. The editor Badagnani has spammed my talk page with accusations for a while now. See this [16] and now after several attempts continues to revert my edits here [17] without discussion. My edits are constantly being followed by reverts from this editor. Please take action, Thank you. Sea888 ( talk) 19:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the lead on that one and getting it done. I was a bit out of my depth on that one. Best wishes, -- TeaDrinker ( talk) 21:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for informing me and for your constructive criticism. I already read the written exchanges you made with Drmies and I now understand the reasons why the affected section should be deleted. With your advice, I'll see to it that I would not commit the same mistake again. -- JinJian ( talk) 21:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, hope you're well. I've come across this article, which looks to have at least one section taken from the publication: Dyer, Frederick Henry, A Compendium of the War of the Rebellion. 3 volumes. (New York: T. Yoseloff), 1908. (having been flagged as a cv of [18]). Now the guy doesn't have a WP article, and I can't find out when he died so what I'm wondering is whether this would be covered by the pre-1923 publication thing and therefore be PD? Can you shed any light on the situation? Cheers, – Toon 21:34, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I greatly appreciate all the effort that you put into understanding the issues involved and your patience in responding to the repeated provocations. Jinfo ( talk) 02:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed
Bertan1311 (
talk ·
contribs) had copied text from a review to
Fight Night Round 4 so I looked over his contribs and found that
Spetsnaz GRU had alot of text copied from various website as well as two-three books (though mainly from one). Could you look over it to see if I missed anything or otherwise messed up (though it's not much left to miss... What's left is simple statements and two one list (one of which, though parts of it is from one of the books, is heavily copy-edited as well as expanded and the other that is simple facts) and a paragraph on knives. I haven't looked closely at his other contribs but will try to do so now. Thanks, --
aktsu (
t /
c)
22:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't we have the option to place the names of significant contributors on the talk page to satisfy the GFDL? Gigs ( talk) 18:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl. A possibly non-bold-noobish question:)... I was in the process of adding a copyvio template to the page Imam al-hussain as it seems to be pasted from http://www.al-islam.org/kaaba14/6.htm or possibly a source on the net that has copied it. In the meantime, another (cleverer ;)) editor has noticed that the subject is already covered in an existing article and has started an AfD nomination. The principle would seem to be to deal with copyvio swiftly to prevent propagation, but the AfD notice specifically requires that the article not be blanked. Should I leave the AfD process to take its course or add the copyvio template anyway? TheSmuel ( talk) 18:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
Thanks for your kind notice, and I do respect copyrights. Does it mean now though that the article can now remain on the site? Can I put in, not paraphrasing but in my own words, the numerous awards he gained (I don't think these awards needed to be published online for me to cite them; they are well known enough that I'm sure musicians who know about this know where the reliable source comes from), and his review of the CDs? You see, a lot of musicians are notable without the need to be boasted on the internet, so I would very much appreciate if Wikipedia editors understand this.
I've also noticed you've deleted the line "His CD of Brahms piano music has recently received excellent reviews and he has subsequently recorded an album of Schumann piano music for Delphian records, as well as a highly acclaimed album of Beethoven's "Emperor" Piano Concerto. " However, you can't really find this phrase in the soundtechniques.tv site; it's not copied from anywhere or paraphrased. It's quite funny actually because I added that myself, so I'm very surprised it got deleted. I would very much like it to be back on again if possible. Anyway thanks for your message and I'll keep the things you mentioned in mind.
Wtjulianchan ( talk) 14:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Recently this article was deleted :(
Can you show me the source of the copyright problems? It should be readily accessible to people in a log since I couldnt find it. I am some-what new to wikipedia, so either Im a novice and can't find where the listed copyright problems are, or this is a terrible system in which articles with tons of referenced material are deleted by a few people who dont even source the material they are basing their decisions on.
Please help, thank you! Jatlas ( talk) 16:10, 11 July 2009 (UTC) Jatlas2 ( talk) 21:11, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
The source of copyright problems is a skimpy webpage, the deleted article was huge. It seems like it was totally inappropriate that the page was deleted... But I guess thats not really my concern. My concern is, I was hoping you could do me a big favor and grant me access to the deleted PSK article's reference section??? If that can be done I would happily recreate the article free of copyright problems. Please let me know if this can be done. Big Thanks Jatlas ( talk) 20:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
THANK YOU! :) Jatlas ( talk) 23:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
G8-able, or was this talk page deliberately left orphaned? – Toon 18:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, that would be a somewhat awkward conversation. On another note, I seem to remember you mentioning a decent plagiarism detection tool that you used; I've become rather disillusioned with the one I normally utilise, could you possibly point me towards it? It'd be much appreciated. – Toon 15:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I have got the copyright holders to send emails to wikipedia extending permission for the text on the Susan Hutchison page, What else needs to be done to clean it up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.58.80 ( talk) 19:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
If you want to restore it I won't stop you. I just noticed using ones besides the default wpbiography seems to break some stats or scripts. Granted, I'm probably the only person that looks at/uses them for all I know. Wizardman 00:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl,
As asked I've added the sources where the quotes were written. Hope that all this will finally solve the problem about the conflict of interest. Thank you very much for all your help. -- Exeko ( talk) 15:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi again Moonriddengirl,
I've changed the whole text giving it a more neutral view. There are references and sources too. Could you please tell me if it's correct now and if it matches with Wikipedia's policy. One final question, do I have to give also a permission for the new text, knowing that I already gave one for the old text and that the sources are the same?
Thanks again. I hope that this issue will finally be solved and that I won't have to bother you again ;).-- Exeko ( talk) 14:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
permissions-en@wikimedia.org. In the body of your letter (but not the subject), please mention ticket # 2009032410050969 and explain that you are writing to grant permission for the original text added and for recent additions under those two licenses. You don't want to put the ticket # in the subject, because that would send it to the French Wikipedia's queue, and you need it connected to the English language Wikipedia. If you leave a note here letting me know when you have sent that letter, I will try to intercept it so that we can expedite it. If another agent picks it up, it will still be handled in good order but may take a few days. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I've just send the mail to grant permission for the text. I corrected a few things in the text. Thank you for your time and help. -- Exeko ( talk) 19:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you with a question on an article you've never contributed to and probably wouldn't be interested in reading but I felt you would be the best person to ask with regard a copyright issue. On the above article a user added some text copied from various sources, I reverted those additions on my basic understanding that it was a copyright violation, that user has now re-added the material with an edit summary of 'Share Alike Lincece 3.0 taken. So this information has legal right to publish'.
As I say I only have basic knowledge of copyright law so don't know if this is a reasonable claim but the adding of material straight from a source without a sign of permission or a sign the source has released the text under a license doesn't seem right to me. Could you take a look and offer a more informed view? -- Jpeeling ( talk) 17:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I see you've linked to a java clock to provide people with the current UTC time. For those without java, wikipedia can actually provide the current time itself, using the {{CURRENTTIME}} directive. The last time this page was updated in cache was at 03:00 UTC.
The only downside is the need for an &action=purge (see: User:Kim_Bruning/servertime) -- Kim Bruning ( talk) 16:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl; you're da bomb! Mgreason ( talk) 17:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, you seem to be a guru on copyright questions; would you mind taking a look at my opinion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artificial robot organism and letting me know whether I've correctly interpreted the situation with regard to the article? I hate copyvios, which I seem to be running into ever more often around here, and I'd appreciate any enlightenment you may be able to offer. Deor ( talk) 04:08, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I have a new article for your consideration, at User:Mgreason/Sandbox 1. Thanks! Mgreason ( talk) 14:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, how dreadful, I had mixed feelings about posting this because of your adminship, but...order a bunch of the top 100 movies? Hope all goes well for you. Best wishes, Novickas ( talk) 18:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Should this article have some note about its initial content coming from aspirin? If so...how to do that best? Thanks! Frank | talk 19:11, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Happy editing!
Hi,
I have in fact had record reviews published in Spin and Maxim UK, and have appeared on Fox News' Red Eye as a music news commentator ten different times in the past nine months. I'm chagrined that you removed all of my review links. It really was not a very nice thing to do.
Mark Prindle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.53.63 ( talk) 06:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I'm back to pester you. Stumbling across this article, added December 2008 using a lot of text from an external source that they released via OTRS under the GFDL. I'm a little hazy about the specifics of what GFDL content we can and cannot accept, so would you be able to take a look? Presumably gaining a release for the CC-BY-SA would be reasonably strightforward if necessary. Either way, there is an issue with the GFDL release statement at the bottom of the article. Your attention is much appreciated. – Toon 13:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I've been offline for a while and an entry I worked on is gone. Can you please point me towards the problem so I can try and address it? Is the original page completely gone, gone? Or can I see an old version and try to resolve the problem. Thanks!
Warning: You are recreating a page that was previously deleted.
You should consider whether it is appropriate to continue editing this page. The deletion and move log for this page are provided here for convenience:
00:29, 14 July 2009 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Anonymous Constellation" (Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for over seven days)
Cheers, Wolfboy21 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfboy21 ( talk • contribs) 17:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. What is currently the best practice for dealing with a copy violation by a new user? I have handled a recent case this way. -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 21:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I see you are an OTRS member, so perhaps you would look at the uploads of Evpope. Two are currently up for deletion File:ScottSystemShoreline.jpg and File:ScottSystemShoreline.jpg and I see that a different one File:Scott System cacti.jpg already has an OTRS ticket. I suggested that she supply confirmation through the OTRS permission system before I saw the ticket in the older image. Because all the images are from the same company, I think we can rescue them all by applying this ticket to all which I understand is possible. I think the intention is that all images should be freely licenced by the company through the uploader, a company employee but she may need to confirm that. TIA ww2censor ( talk) 22:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I happen to have found an article that was a copy of another article, the former I deleted, the latter is Against All Odds, and I am concerned that it could be a copyright page; I have no proof, but my sixth sense is tingling...If you get a chance, could you look at the page? I would appreciate it. TomStar81 ( Talk • Some say ¥€$, I say NO) 00:43, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I lifted both inspiration and some verbatim text from your edit notice. I did it because I unilaterally decided that your waiver for creative content you posted on my talk page would also apply to this. :) MLauba ( talk) 11:52, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Did you ever get a chance to look at Mshahidnawaz9's about 60 images that I mentioned here which all look suspect to me. TIA ww2censor ( talk) 17:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
←I've started a new PUI listing. For my own convenience, I'm listing some here that I think may be his, as I think perhaps his username might connect him with these people:
Everything else I've found (I'm starting on the bottom) is at PUI. Which is overwhelming it. :/ -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Duh. I finally found out why so many of the week-old WP:SCV reports I had been looking at this week had been sorted by you and your peers from WP:CP without ever having been tagged with {{ copyvio}}. I never realized that DumbBot was copying CSB noms to WP:CP. Sometimes I'm dense like concrete. MLauba ( talk) 14:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
...me again. Can you comment on my handling of Peter of Juilly earlier today? In a nutshell, it was created as a copyvio, tagged by Coren's bot, and then rewritten by the original creator in a temp space. That seemed sufficient in my view to delete the original under G12 and replace it with the rewritten version, case closed. Yes/no/maybe? Frank | talk 16:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Great - thanks both! Frank | talk 22:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Happy editing!
I'm not quite back yet -- still on the road -- just checked in for a brief WP fix the other day. Considering the problems that CP issues can cause, I'm surprised that you are the only admin weeding through that little jungle. Without you, there is no doubt it would be a completely overgrown disaster. For some oddball reason, I kind of like playing around in there. (Maybe the same oddball reason it appeals to you? Could it just be obligation? Sense of duty? Or is it some sort of internet masochism? Penance? Nah, who knows.) Anyway, I'm still leaving the more difficult problems for you to handle. I was glad you mentioned the User:Moonriddengirl/cup template, and I've now bookmarked a few of your other gems User:Moonriddengirl/frequently used templates and User:Moonriddengirl/Copyright cleanup). And will continue to follow your lead. I won't be back until the end of July, but you can count on my help. Feel free to give me a shout anytime. — CactusWriter | needles 20:13, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello....I'm am responding to the Victor di Suvero copyright issue....I'm sorry that I have not been able to respond sooner. I am the administrative assistant at Pennywhistle Press and I have full authority to grant anyone in the book permission to reprint or use any part of the "We Came to Santa Fe" book. Therefore, I give Wikipedia permission to use any part of "We Came to Santa Fe" in the Victor di Suvero article. Thank you. If you have any questions, please feel to contact me at <redacted contact information>.
Can you please respond to at one of the emails above so that I know the issue has or has not been cleared up. I appreciate it very much.
Brandywine Avila Pennywhistle Press —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vdisuvero ( talk • contribs) 21:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello....(I am not sure if I'm doing this correctly either!)
I'm am responding to the Victor di Suvero copyright issue....I'm sorry that I have not been able to respond sooner. I am the administrative assistant at Pennywhistle Press and I have full authority to grant anyone in the book permission to reprint or use any part of the "We Came to Santa Fe" book. Therefore, I give Wikipedia permission to use any part of "We Came to Santa Fe" in the Victor di Suvero article. Thank you. If you have any questions, please feel to contact me at <redacted contact information>.
Can you please respond to at one of the emails above so that I know the issue has or has not been cleared up. I appreciate it very much.
Brandywine Avila Pennywhistle Press Vdisuvero ( talk) 21:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I want to ask why did you deleted my Article. (Arthur Sarkissian) what can i do to open it? pleaseeeeeeeeeeee help me! Arthur Sarkissian is well known painter in armenia and over world please look what can you do! and ples let me add that Article THX! Vahan you can write me an e mail <contact information redacted>
Thank you for keeping the article, and overriding it with the content of the temporary page. Otumba ( talk) 15:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
User_talk:MBisanz#deletion, it deals with a G12 of yours that I did the G8 cleanup on that it looks like the person re-created. Leaving to your judgment. MBisanz talk 09:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi MRG - I saw at least one article ( Tariff-rate quota) listed by Corenbot at the cpv page for including material published by this source. Since it's public domain, would it be OK if I created {{ CRS}} under US Govt Public Domain templates to cover this situation? Regards, Novickas ( talk) 13:22, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
See here. Cheers, -- aktsu ( t / c) 14:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I wonder if I could request your expertise on a subject I've raised here, regarding a possible copyvio thingy (your name was recommended). Thanks very much, Ranger Steve ( talk) 20:02, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Although I've seen your name a lot, I don't think we've ever interacted, so I'm surprised you noticed. Many thanks :-) ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I understand your need to delete the page based on the following. The creation of this page was my initial foray into this and I had to temporarily leave it and before getting back had figured the resemblance of text to the original was probably the problem. Your deletion of this confirmed this. However, I am actually the editor-in-chief of this journal and a friend of mine heads the e-century publishers that host the journal. So I don't think getting the formal copyright approval will be an issue - just as a novice I am not entirely sure what I need to provide. Sorry to be a nuisance-- MolecEpidemiolFan ( talk) 23:12, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry if I have inadvertently started a different thread, I tried and failed to find a way to respond further to your helpful clarification on what I need to do re copyright. If I re-draft the page then in (an other version of;-) my words (as I provided the text content for the ijmeg pages) will this allow the page to be visible again rather than it be locked? thanks again.-- MolecEpidemiolFan ( talk) 23:30, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok Moonriddengirl - how did I do this time round its called exactly the same (hope its not a problem!) - can you check and if ok make it go "live"? I have another page I am writing now to also link to it if possible. thanks again for the speedy reply! —Preceding unsigned comment added by MolecEpidemiolFan ( talk • contribs) 00:32, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi I am running out of steam at the moment to be able to complete the additional references for the IJMEG and e-century pages I have just created. Will they remain live for a few days to give me chance to enhance them or do they no run the risk of deletion?-- MolecEpidemiolFan ( talk) 01:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Roger Davies asked me to write up a four- to six-paragraph description of what plagiarism is and how to avoid plagiarism for the MilHist Academy. Would you mind looking over the reduction of our dispatch that I've constructed? I would appreciate it. Awadewit ( talk) 03:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
←It flows very nicely. You've distilled it in a way that it isn't obvious that there are huge chunks missing. :) It seems a bit long still, if six-paragraphs is your limit, depending on how you count it. I come up with roughly 11. Tightening wording could reduce some paragraphs at the expense of some eloquence.
Under paraphrasing and summarizing, you might want to consider combining those two into one paragraph, since the first gives a level of detail that may not be necessary for practical application—perhaps like:
Adapting source text, whether by paraphrasing or summarizing (similar techniques that differ in level of detail), is a complex skill, and contributors to Wikipedia need to be alert to the potential for inadvertent plagiarism. Many editors believe that by changing a few words here or there—or even by changing a great number of the words found in the original source—they have avoided plagiarism. This is not necessarily the case. Nor does the mere rearrangement of clauses, sentences, or paragraphs avoid the problem.
For brevity, I might remove the "good" paraphrase example and simply refer to the full dispatch for more.
It seems like the last section could be tightened. Hmmm. I think statements like "This can be done either in hard copy or by using an electronic filing system." may be unnecessarily detailed for a short overview. Also, I realize that the more formal language was desired for the dispatch, but I wonder if switching out "you" for "editors" might make this easier for general reading. It's an intimidating subject for some people, and a friendlier, less formal approach, might help. :) Trying to get it all into one paragraph, I come up (quickly) with the following:
You can minimize the tendency to reuse text through several approaches, including proper note taking and using multiple sources. You might find it more difficult to avoid following that text too closely if you rely on only one source, as you will necessarily be limited to the details it presents. You will also find it more difficult to rewrite if you copy and paste text from your sources directly into your working drafts. Instead, you should (1) locate several sources, where possible; (2) assemble and organize notes and excerpts from these sources by topic; (3) read and absorb this material; and (4) write a draft version, in you own words and under your own organizational schema, of each topic. There are a number of ways to organize material; you should not closely follow a source's structure, either in overall organization, or in the composition and arrangement of sentences and paragraphs within each section. When you're finished, compare your draft with you source material to be sure you haven't accidentally used the author's original words. If you will not have easy access to original sources when you finish writing your final draft, you might find it useful (when taking original notes for your own use) to take them verbatim, with quotation marks, so you can see at a glance what language the original author used.
These ideas are, of course, off the top of my head. :) They aren't as elegant in construction as our original, but I'm trying to think of ways to boil this down to a simple "how to" that fits within that brief four-to-six paragraphs without losing any of the essential points.
Having suggested some removals, with this—"enclosed within quotation marks"—you might want to add something like "or in block quote". Working at WP:Plagiarism tells me that some people would want this acceptable alternative spelled out. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Zoom on a ticket, then for each line you have a link labeled (plain) : |-> 1. customer (email-external)(plain) John Doe <john.doe@isp.com>: OTRS Application Live. Cheers, guillom 07:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi there Moon
Is it possible to create a montage of CC-BY 2.0, CC-BY-SA 2.0, CC-BY-SA 2.5, and CC-BY-SA 3.0 images and license the result with CC-BY-SA 3.0, or somehow just declare the respective images and their licenses? I'd imagine that there should be some way to do this.
Image in question is
File:Toronto Montage 2.jpg, built from
1
2
3
4
5
6
7.
Thanks & Cheers,
Amalthea
08:44, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
I have had a go at a clean version at Talk:Robert Henry Cain/Temp. Could you possibly take a look when you have got time? Thanks, Woody ( talk) 17:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Happy editing!
![]() |
The Gastropod-star | |
Moonriddengirl, for all the hard work you and your team put into WikiProjectGastropods, saving 1,000 of our articles, I award you this Barnstar. Invertzoo ( talk) 13:29, 26 July 2009 (UTC) |
![]() |
A piece of Jimbo's star | |
For the hard effort you put into helping make WikiProjectGastropods as great as it is, I award you a nice-sized chunk of the barnstar that Jimbo gave us on July 25 2009. This piece has a diamond in it! Invertzoo ( talk) 12:40, 26 July 2009 (UTC) |
Hi Monnriddengirl,
First of all congratulation on your award. I just wanted to know if you had the time to read and control the changes on the Wayne Schoenfeld article. And wanted to know if the changes are yet good enough in order to delete the conflict of interest. Thank you for your help and time. -- Exeko ( talk) 14:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. Woops! yes it is one I missed, see User:Philip Baird Shearer/BCWs copyright issues, for an overview. You might like to read Talk:James Temple#Copyleft problem to join in the conversation on Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems#James Temple -- PBS ( talk) 15:04, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello - Exinda recently updating our listing with revised content. My understanding is that there was a previous posting that you had concerns about copyright issues. It appears that the second posting was also deleted but I'm not exactly sure. We're keen to get new appropriate content posted. Can you please clarify for me? Our writer is out of town this week and I'm following up on his behalf.
tx Krista Burns Marketing Director Exinda Inc.
38.112.106.62 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC).
Thank you for your assistance in developing this page to meet Wiki standards. Your help is greatly appreciated. Clftruthseeking ( talk) 18:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
You may want to consider changing <pulling out stuff that is making my page really wide> so that the link works equally well for users of the secure and non-secure servers. Thanks.— C45207 | Talk 03:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl, I don't know if you remember me but how have you been? Hey could you check out this users edits, he has been adding and removing information which seems to be with a racial intent on the articles related to the northern regions of Sri Lanka such as Northern Province, Sri Lanka , Mannar District and others. I have told him to stop vandalising the page but he continues, and has used unreliable sources like this [30], he also seems to be a member of WikiProject Sri Lanka. I have also told him to explain his edits on the talk page before he edits the article, and it is turning into a edit war. Could you please tell this person to stop his vandalism and follow the proper wikipedia protocaol. Thanks Blackknight12 ( talk) 06:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
I know you are trust worthy so I have an important task that I would like you to do for WikiProject Eurovision, a project I am a member of. There has been a lot of controvery on the project regarding what sources are reliable and which are not, and as a result I opened an RfC to try and settle the issue. It has now been going for over a month and seems to have run out of steam, with a straw poll held towards the end to see how opinions are spread out. There is a lot to read through and I think it would be best if someone impartial interpretes any consensus that has been formed, and I think you meet the criteria for that. I would like you if you could spare the time to write a conclusion on each source given making the verdict you think is most appropriate weighing up the spread of opinion, arguements, and ultimatly consensus. Possible verdicts for each source include no consensus, not reliable, semi-reliable, and reliable. If you don't have time I can always find someone else to do it instead, many thanks in any case. Camaron · Christopher · talk 08:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
This version [31] of Wong Doc-Fai was copyvio from [32] - are the changes sufficient? I've been asked and although I think they probably are, I'd like a second opinion. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 20:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
I thought you made an excellent summing up of the discussion. Jezhotwells ( talk) 15:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Your closure was well justified and was along the lines on how I expected it to be. Yes you were right on what a semi-reliable source was, and correctly highlighted the limits of polling and the problems with it on a non-yes or no issue such as reliable sourcing. I had not thought of evolution, but yes you are probably right that many of these sources are evolving, particularly ESCToday. With the RfC off the project's chest we can now address other issues. Thank you again and I hope to see you around in the future. Camaron · Christopher · talk 20:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I am not sure whether Edward Balliol really did have copyright problems. IIRC, the For the Lion author contributed a fair bit to the article, so he may well have reused some favourite phrases ... but perhaps I am being stupid? Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks... for your suggestions —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueLankan ( talk • contribs) 19:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
I responded to your note on Talk:Albert Fish regarding the release date of the documentary in January 2009 vs. the good article status date of February 2007 and content stability since that time. There is no validity to a claim of copyright infringement regarding this article and I would request that my statement be forwarded to those in charge of determining this. Thanks. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 20:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Any thoughts about this image, just added to Rickey Henderson? I found this and this (many copies) which are similar but not identical. User:Quadell hasn't been around for several days; any advice how to proceed? Frank | talk 23:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
An anon IP continues to remove your template from Albert Fish. I have a bit of trouble verifying this because I don't see exactly where the vio is. I'd appreciate it if you'd take a look. I've warned the editor a few times now. Shadowjams ( talk) 09:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks for your feedback. It's my first time making an update, so I very much appreciate your help. I'm going to attempt to repost, bearing in mind the notes you made about the previous attempt. Congrats on the recognition! Eeness ( talk) 14:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)Eeness
Do you think This was lifted from here? – xeno talk 00:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm the guy who only calls when he needs some money, or a ride, or some copyvio help... ;) MRG, would you mind having a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH) and the associated article? I placed a copyvio template on it, but one editor wonders if that's correct, and I'm not 100% sure myself. Your cash, your Cadillac, and your time are, as always, appreciated! Drmies ( talk) 01:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
It's good that OTRS now directs clearly to Wikipedia:Contact us, but it misses an option for those who want to give us permission to use non-photo content. Also, see my comments here, and here. If we want people to give us free stuff we should make it as easy and friendly as possible... Btw, feel free to repost my comment to some forum - I am not sure however where this could be. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Albert Fish, could not possibly be a film by John Borowski. The Holmes-Pitezel Case, by Detective Frank P. Geyer, whereabouts was in Philadelphia. The Albert Fish Case, whereabouts, was in New York City. What happened to Ms. Grace Budd is flat out more enlightening when one reads the same did not happen to Edward. One should always keep in mind that it was Detective Frank P. Geyer who was on the case in New York City. Philly is not far from where Edward Budd was taken from us. Same with Billy Gaffney, except I came under the direct impression Billy Gaffney is really Edward Budd. John Borowski can go figure his own point out. The clencher is Black Mass by Lehr and O'Neill, not Portrait of Evil I would think by Borowski, which has alot more to do about the Budd and Pitezel case than about the Benjamin and Albert case. My big problem is staying focussed on the fact Howard did not deserve to die, his sister did not play well with him. LAMMERGRIFFIN ( talk) 03:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
...for keeping a watch over my talk page. I really do appreciate you stepping in and providing opinion. And, yeah, as you notice, I'm finally back at home now -- totally jet-lagged, but that doesn't seem to affect the quality of my edits (hmm, that ain't a good sign). If you've noticed any screw-ups on my CV edits, or anything I should consider, please drop me a note -- I'm still feeling my way through the proper process. By the way, this simple gem shows you may be the calmest, kindest, most even-keeled person around here -- or on a permanent lithium drip. Not sure which, but I am consistently impressed. — CactusWriter | needles 08:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
...of Amity University from a copyvio point of view? Compare http://www.careernews4u.com/amity-university.html and first section. Since it's just the first section, how to fix this issue? I removed an entire section of current events which wasn't encyclopedic to start with and also had some copyvio content. Thanks! Frank | talk 10:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl!! I´am an one of Freemason project´s member and since one/two months ago, i uploaded an image from Boaz and Jachin ( talkpage) (not exactly the real one, on porpose to just showing a replica of the pillars) [38], yesterday, one guy took off the image in all available languages articles, and the in french page of Boaz and Jachin, the "anonymous person" took out as well in the top page, which was, "This is the part of series of Freemason" (in french language), the person who made this, argued also : "....your image in some languages of Wikipedia and inappropriate manner, which does not tolerate. Any serious researcher believes that the columns were not Masonic." and modified the category of my image uploaded... my question is, is this true?!? The guy is a skeptical person... Really.. i don´t no the reason what he did this...
Regards. Lightwarrior2 ( talk) 23:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
For not just your tireless and inspiring work on copyright problems but also from slaving through the histpurge backlog with the old and impractical diff parameter (now gone). MLauba ( talk) 16:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC) |
Hi and thanks again for your efforts regarding the Fish and Holmes articles. I came across a website not long ago, and a page in particular there, about Billy the Kid. It looked quite familiar to me and when I looked further, discovered the article posted is a duplicate of a version of our Billy the Kid from mid-2006. It is marked as a copyright, 1998 & 2006, but it doesn't give attribution to Wikipedia at all, and it's clear that's where they got it. I haven't looked at the other pages they have listed, but thought I would eventually. I sent a letter to the owner of the site, noting that attribution is supposed to be given under the license we use, but didn't get a response. What I'm wondering is whether there is anything that should be done about it, and if so, what. Thanks. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 17:54, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
'Fair cop Guv'. I was feeling lazy and just re-arranged things and the odd word, I will try again sometime unless someone beats me to it. The real problem is that there are very few sources with anything other than a very brief description, so I am forced to use only what is available and my literary talents get pushed to the limit, or I just get plain lazy. Thanks for the advice and the vigilance. Petebutt ( talk) 06:44, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Greetings, Moonriddengirl:
I've got a new article for review:
User:Mgreason/Sandbox 3
No big hurry; I see you've been staying busy. Thanks!
Mgreason (
talk)
20:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi.
Is there a problem if i use links to sites in spanish as refs for the english wikipedia? Zidane tribal ( talk) 01:19, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding the potential plausability of that redirect. I hope clear heads prevail through this massive deletionism campaign. Tyciol ( talk) 10:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I am only finding 2k results for this collection of words, which was simply a typo by Tyciol in the first place. That's less than 1% of the results for the whole name. I've never seen anyone actually refer to the series without "Rider" in the name, usually it's the whole name, or just "Ryuki".— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙) 11:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl! I wanted to ask for some advice. A user claiming on his/her userpage to represent Devendra Banhart's management repeatedly removes reliably sourced article content without valid reason or discussion. Do I post this on WP:COIN, because despite the corporate username (Lookout Management) I can't proove that this is a corporate identity and not just someone claiming to be. Similar changes went on from IP addresses for some time. Could you be so nice look over User_talk:Lktmgmt and give thoughts on what best to do? Thank you very much. Hekerui ( talk) 19:11, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Belated thanks for your excellent edit on this, which I have only just read. Hugh Mason ( talk • contribs 10:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Mrg. I was checking today's Copyvio listings and ran across some more of your Paknur project. (What did you ever do to deserve that lovely bit of punishment?) I saw one note at Talk:Qilla Abdullah District and wanted to let you know that I had investigated the Om Gupta Encyclopaedia of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh a couple of months ago and determined it was copied from Wikipedia. (My discussions are here and here. I removed all references to that text from WP -- and knew I should have followed it up with a wider notification. Sorry. I hope this hasn't screwed up anything for you. — CactusWriter | needles 11:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Should you have a free moment at some point, feel free to weigh in at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Allstarecho in regards to the copyvio concern as well as the past but recent copyvio issue we went through. I've been quite careful in regards to copyvio and close paraphrasing but someone else seems to think otherwise. Considering our history, I feel it best to let you speak about it and my efforts in helping right my wrongs. - ALLST✰R▼ echo wuz here 11:47, 4 August 2009 (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 10 | ← | Archive 13 | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | → | Archive 20 |
Hi Moonriddengirl, I was amazed and bit furious to found out that one of my user pages, User:Chanakal/My Contributions is hosted here. Seems to be they are using a web frame. I immediately added userpage template to the page. Felt like my privacy being abused. Don't know whether you are the correct person to report this. Nevertheless hope you'll help me. Cheers! Chanaka L ( talk) 09:58, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the great work and diligence on determining copyright issues on the Billboard year-end Hot 100 charts. I'm glad we've got something to go by now. -- Wolfer68 ( talk) 17:04, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
I am the user HendrixMorisson who was added the article Arthur Sarkissian. You was deleted it please tell me why? i have add that article 5 times and now my user is blocked! Arthur Sarkissian article is about painter Arthur Sarkissian. and it's my father why i cnat add it? and what copyright i need? PLEASEEEEEEEEE tell me what can i do and how you can help me?? THX!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vahansarkissian ( talk • contribs)
Hope you have a pleasant break from Wiki. When you get back into the flow, please review User:Mgreason/Sandbox 3. Thanks! Mgreason ( talk) 18:57, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello, wikpedia is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License. It does mean that I can add texts under CC-BY-SA-3.0 or under CC-BY-3.0. Am I right?
Wikipedia:Copyrights and Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials states, that I can add also texts under CC-BY-SA-compatible licenses.
What are these CC-BY-SA-compatible licenses? Are these all licenses: CC-BY-SA-1.0, CC-BY-1.0, CC-BY-SA-2.0, CC-BY-2.0?
Creative Commons webpage does not provide any Creative commons licenses [3] and does not provide any additional information.
CC-BY-2.0 [4] says that "No works are automatically put under the new license" and the same says CC-BY-1.0 license.
There is directly in Creative Commons licenses article used text licensed under CC-BY-1.0: "Portions of this article are taken from the Creative Commons website, published under the Creative Commons Attribution License v1.0." Is it OK or not?
I would like to be sure if may I or may I not add text under CC-BY-2.0 to wikipedia? Thanks. -- Snek01 ( talk) 11:45, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
Please see my comment here; I'd appreciate your input. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:01, 25 June 2009 (UTC)
I will provide the required response that will include a specified text associated with the copyright permission. Bci2Nu 05:18, 27 June 2009 (UTC)Bci2( talk).
![]() |
Welcome back |
Glad you're back! Hope your time off was restful and invigorating, in whatever proportion best suits you. – Quadell ( talk) 00:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC) |
Hi, do you think you could take a look at this issue which I reported to ANI? No one seems to be interested :\ -- aktsu ( t&nbs]p;/ c) 17:18, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Need a vacation after the vacation? A good sign, but no good graphic AFAIK.
Question, is this being appropriately handled? Talk:Silesian_Uprisings#Copyright_violations. On June 24th the editor stated some possible understanding with the author, but it has not since been confirmed at the page. No hurry?
Also, do you know of any in-house copyvio tool development, apart from the new article bot? Novickas ( talk) 19:54, 28 June 2009 (UTC)
Glad to see that you did remember and found some time. Nice. Might have to check that one out. I, on the other hand, am out of here for the next month while traveling. So I'm afraid that I won't be providing much of a regular assist for you and once again you are on your lonesome. (As if you aren't used to that.) Sorry 'bout that. I'll be back at the end of July. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 07:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Sorry to bother you, but I'm still having troubles getting the VT iDirect page created. I re-created it today based on the long list of comments I received, but it was deleted by ERK while I was still working on it. Can you help me get the page put back up or let me know what I'm doing wrong?
Thank you!—Preceding unsigned comment added by Photoguy11579 ( talk • contribs) 14:11, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi again. I read your comments back to me; thank you. I've reworked portions of the article to make them neutral by taking out phrases like 'its a good company... provides a good service'. I've also linked it to another Wiki article and added several new, independent sources/resources/links. Does it now pass the requirements it needs to be listed as VT iDirect (not my user page)? Thanks again for your help. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
Photoguy11579 (
talk •
contribs)
15:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
This is still full of copyright material placed there by the author, do we just leave it or? I know you emailed him, did you use this address?: Raymond.Paterson@btopenworld.com Dougweller ( talk) 17:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I write you this message only to have some information about what else to do in order to take away the "conflict of interest" message and the message about the lack of references. I've posted more references of third party sources as asked in order to not only have one primary source. The text has also The permission for use of this work in the Wikimedia OTRS system. If there is something else I could do, I will try to do the best.
Thank you very much for your help. Best regards, -- Exeko ( talk) 20:10, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your answer. I'll see what I can do about that.--
Exeko (
talk)
14:26, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello Again, I added some new information about what you asked in the Wayne Schoenfeld article. Are they sufficient to solve our issue? Here the information that I added :
About who says that Through The Eyes Of Man Erotic is "operatic"' ...I put this information : This quote comes from an essay written about THROUGH THE EYES OF MAN by Douglas Meyer, Professor of Art and Art History at Mt. St. Mary's College in Los Angeles. By OPERATIC professor Meyer refers to the elaborate staging including scenery and costumes characteristic of Schoenfeld's carefully constructed tableau vivants . This is a style originally incorporated into Italian Opera because it was the most complete art form of the day including acting, music and elaborate art direction and costumes.
About Who says Almost Perfect is "a disturbing visual account"? Who says that these themes "are heroic and worthwhile"? Whose opinion is it that one book is poignant, another colorful? ...I put this information : These quotes and opinions were written by Donald C. Rogers who, at the time was the Vice President of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences and the recipient of the special Gordon E. Sawyer OSCAR for Lifetime Achievement in the motion picture arts. After over 40 years in the movie business, Mr. Rogers was expressing that the book ALMOST PERFECT was an important work with the photography capturing the drama of a finely crafted motion picture.
I also added two other sources :
I hope this will solve the problem. Best regards,-- Exeko ( talk) 18:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
could you figure out what I did wrong? I put copyvio templates on two pages, Nlectc and National Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center, both copyright violations and both put up by the same user. Then I dropped the standard notification thingamajing from the template onto the user's talk page, and now there's something weird about it--another editor's signature follows it, etc. Maybe this isn't a big deal, but either way, this being your area of expertise, maybe you can wait making that sixth cup of tea for today and have a quick look? I'm going to make some coffee now. Cookie? Drmies ( talk) 20:59, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello dear Moonriddengirl,
I understand you've not had a lot to do (since I haven't caused much disruption the last 12 hours), so perhaps I could bother you for a moment. Please have a look at the discussion on User_talk:Drmies#Tacloban and at the copyvio template I dropped on Tacloban City (in the middle). There's a license on the website from which the stuff was copied, but I am not that clever that I know what that means. (What I do know is that copying and pasting makes for poor encyclopedic text, usually.) Could you have a look and weigh in? Thank you so much for your help, as always! Drmies ( talk) 16:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I have a question about an article you saved/constructed admist much tomfoolery a year or two back - Jon Courtney. There is a quote on that page from Drowned in Sound (an unpaid, unqualified user-reviewer named Septic Clit) which seems highly inappropriate source material. I believe it was originally included to provide a balanced opinion. While the reasoning is sound, I don't think it's right to include such a poor source, and maybe another more reliable quote making a similar point should be sought. Anyway, I tried to delete this quote, and a single-account editor, Rightphone, who has already vandalised two Courtney-related articles, reversed my deletion. Rather than get in an edit war, I posted a query on the reliable sources page ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Drowned_in_Sound), which was picked up by an admin/editor Dreamguy, who said lots of the sources are unreliable, and he put a banner on the page saying so. My attempts to ask what needs to be changed have been met with silence recently, so I was wondering if I could get your opinion a) about that Drowned in Sound quote and b) about the sources on that page in general (and if the banner is justified). Thanks so much! Thedarkfourth ( talk) 16:08, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey, is there documentation for this script anywhere? – Quadell ( talk) 20:13, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi there, I noticed you were quite knowledgeable when it comes to copyright issues. I was hoping to get a recommendation from you with regards to the Richard Perry article. Per discussions with a user claiming to be working for the subject, the author apparantly gives permission for the material to be put on Wikipedia. But until this is confirmed by the author should the article be blanked as a copyvio? -- œ ™ 21:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for dealing with College of Mount St. Joseph at WP:CV. I must admit I was getting a bit lazy (or just sick of copyvio). You look like you do lots of helpful work at WP:CV, so keep up the good work! WordyGirl90 ( talk) 21:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have reverted your edit to this page, I hope you don't mind. If you recall, you "approved" the original article on the grounds of balance. You did not find anything wrong with the sources then, but you now seem to have changed your opinion., which everyone is entitled to do. Could I therefore ask that you, as a senior administrator, check the remainig sources as the page banner requests, and further delete any poorly sourced material, of which there is lots. I agree that this is a case of poorly sourced material being used to balance equally poorly sourced material, but that is the nature of this article. Rightphone ( talk) 11:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moon, I'm currently working on the Lindbergh kidnapping to move it to GA review and I had some concerns about some of the images used. If you get a chance, could you please look the images over and let me know if there are any problems. Thanks! Shinerunner ( talk) 20:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Greetings, I've had a look. Here's what I found:
Hope this helps! – Quadell ( talk) 12:54, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonridden, Could you take a look at my concerns at Imagination Movers? I made a post at Wikipedia_talk:Suspected_copyright_violations#Imagination_Movers, but nobody seems to really watch that page, and I know that Copyvio is one of your strong suits.--- Balloonman NO! I'm Spartacus! 22:15, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I am one of the Movers and need to understand what is happening to our Wikipedia page. Not sure what is going on but please email me - <redacted> —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.179.204.91 ( talk) 18:10, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, what's the next step? An administrator/trix needs to resolve the issue--do you mind? Just go ahead and delete the contents--the whole things needs to be rewritten anyway, and since the section is splitting off it will be short and sweet. Your help is much appreciated. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 15:06, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, MRG, I'm juggling a bunch of things and your message got dropped. You don't have to do anything more, but filing an SPI may help by getting more eyes on the case. -- Avi ( talk) 17:19, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
We're the Imagination Movers and were notified by fans that our Wikipage is on the fritz. Could you please explain what's going on? You can email <redacted> to let us know what we should be doing to secure our representation here.
Hello Moonriddengirl, this is Survir, and agian I need your help. There is this IP address user, who has been continuously destroying the page, List of programs broadcast by DD National. The IP address begins with 117.196. (117.196.99.3, 117.196.100.1, 117.196.101.19, 117.196.101.170, etc...). Is there any way to block this person. Besides, since you have become wiki admin (congrats), can you please help me move the following pages, Colors (India TV channel) to Colors (TV channel) as this is more appropriate, since there is no other article on wikipedia with the same name exists, & also Dill Mill Gaye to Dill Mill Gayye, the title is misspelled. I will be very thankful to you! Your wiki friend, Survir ( talk) 18:07, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I sent you an email about something I mentioned a while back. Cheers, - Jarry1250 [ humourous – discuss ] 14:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Please see my comment here. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 15:02, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have no idea where to go to discuss whether or not sources are copyright violations or not. Could you please take a look at UN Security Council Resolution 1804? It's copied from the sources, which is a un.org page. What's the word on copyright from the UN? Are they public domain, or copyrightable? Who then was a gentleman? ( talk) 02:23, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Turns out you are correct about http://www.44defense.com . The domain was registered in February 2008. The content at issue was added to the American football strategy page in June 2006 here. Good catch. ... Kenosis ( talk) 18:50, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
User:Allstarecho/Fuglies are not notable has been called into question as violating GFDL as most of it came from User:GlassCobra/Essays/Hotties are always notable. What do I need to do with it to attribute User:GlassCobra? - ALLST✰R▼ echo wuz here 21:16, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
←Ah, well, if it is deleted and recreated, it'll have to be done with care to avoid infringing on the licensing rights of other contributors to the essay. I see a few other names in history, though I don't know if their contributions rise to the level of creativity that requires attribution. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:28, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
FYI: I've tagged LAMBDA School of Music and Fine Arts with WP:CSD#G12. I couldn't find a substantive revision without copyrighted text. You had cleaned this page up a while a go, so I though I'd let you know. — C45207 | Talk 03:32, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Your user page has a leave me a message link. May I suggest using {{ fullurl}} for that link? There's some info about it at Wikipedia:Fullurl. The replacement code would be: <span class="plainlinksneverexpand">[{{fullurl:User_talk:Moonriddengirl|action=edit§ion=new}} <font color=blue>leave me a message</font>]</span>.— C45207 | Talk 03:35, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for creating the verify permissions template, {{ User:Moonriddengirl/vp}}! Do you know of more like it?— C45207 | Talk 03:45, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
You made some recent related edits to the page, thought you might want to see this. (Watching) - Dank ( push to talk) 04:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi and thanks for helping out previously! It still doesn't appear Sea888 ( talk · contribs) understands the problem though, as his first edit when returning after being blocked for edit warring was inserting (diff) the line...
"Carano and Cyborg, the consensus two best female fighters in the world, will be the first women in MMA history to headline a major MMA fight card. In addition, they will fight for the first STRIKEFORCE 145-pound Female Championship.
from this press release to the Strikeforce article while replacing the perfectly fine mention of it already there (also, that they're the "consensus two best female fighters in the world" is Strikeforce hyping up the fight as it's pretty far from the truth (as described by me at WT:MMA while citing proper rankings etc., but as it's sourced (Fox Sports posted (but didn't write) a small note on it retelling the press release etc.) I don't know what do to about it). His other changes in the diff is copy-pasting the rules section from the UFC article, which shouldn't be a problem I think, and while I don't like the "Mainstream emergence"-section I don't think there's any copyvio involved. Could you take a look again? Thanks, -- aktsu ( t / c) 14:19, 3 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi I've added back the information that wasn't objectable. Cheers. Sea888 ( talk) 08:00, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
G W … 18:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback on Jessie Ball duPond Fund.
I've got a different kind of new article at User:Mgreason/Sandbox 5 Please let me know what you think. Thanks! Mgreason ( talk) 04:05, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
I did a rewrite on Dinner theater at User:Mgreason/Sandbox. When you have a few minutes, I'd appreciate a critique. Thanks for your help! Mgreason ( talk) 12:29, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I was wondering if you could clear something up for BreakingDawn 90210, who has a habit of uploading replacement images for articles such as Blair Waldorf and Kelly Taylor (90210). The problem is that this person's uploads use the same file name as the preexisting image, but feature completely new pictures that the original copyright, source, and rationale info doesn't apply to.
I've undone the uploads and attempted to inform this person a few times of why this is improper (in edit summaries and on their talk page now). Since then, the user has done the same thing with the Naomi Clark image. Since I don't appear to be getting through, I'd appreciate it if you could put a word in, as perhaps you can explain it more clearly. Thank you. -- James26 ( talk) 07:45, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I have started a discussion on formalizing merger edit summaries at Help talk:Merging#Edit summaries, best practice. Since you had valuable input the last time I raised this suggestion and at the related discussion WT:WikiProject International relations/Bilateral relations task force#Merge and delete, I hope you will comment. Thanks. Flatscan ( talk) 04:59, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, If you've a moment could you please have a look at Talk:List of Jewish Nobel prize winners. An IP (85.250.189.18) has deleted all the comments of User:Jinfo and removed the copyvio template from the article. If it were simply a matter of using Template:uw-tpv1 I wouldn't bother you, but because there is an underlying copyvio argument I would appreciate your assistance/advice before I do anything. Cheers, Beeswaxcandle ( talk) 08:23, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi - can you pls. explain what you did to the Saul Steinberg (business) article? I am fairly sure there was a version that could have been used between 2007 and today. By deleting not only the copyrighted materials but also the entire edit history it is difficult to say what is there and what is missing. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 13:47, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Check your email. You can reply here or my talk page or by email, whatever is best. Dougweller ( talk) 09:01, 4 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. There's been a question raised at an FLC about "extensive quotation of copyrighted text" (from Wikipedia:Non-free content#Text) in Rumford Prize. Do you think that the usage of quotation is excessive in the list? Any information/guidance on this (at the FLC) would be much appreciated. Dabomb87 ( talk) 17:22, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
←I think that using this text may be a problem. But I've asked for additional review at WT:NFC and WT:C and will also ask at WT:COPYCLEAN. Since there are several lists at issue here, it would be good to develop consensus. :) I've left my initial thoughts at the above FLC, but will wait until such consensus emerges to have a say at the second. (Just because currently I'd probably be redundant. :D) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:52, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
MILHIST needs your help with yet another incident of extensive plagarism. - MBK 004 18:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
You are invited to participate in an interesting discussion at Wikipedia talk:Image use policy#File:Man Utd FC .svg. Your comments & suggestions is very much appeciated Arteyu ? Blame it on me ! 18:54, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
Was not aware of the copyright tag on Concurrent relation. I disagree that this is a violation for the following several reasons, and also make these comments: 1) the source has an error that was not included but corrected in the Wikipedia article; 2) the variable names in Wikipedia were changed to differentiate from the source names; 3) although of no consequence to this discussion, another reputable website has the "exact" word-for-word definition (true copy/paste) http://mathworld.wolfram.com/ConcurrentRelation.html; 4) a mathematical definition can not change from website to website, no more than the meaning of a word can change from website to website, there will be have to be similarities; 5) the source cites 3 references from where the definition came from, hence, not an original definition; 6) the originator of the copyright tag (user Arthur Rubin) is acting with prejudice against the best interest of Wikipedia for the following reasons: a) He has stated a general negative bias against this particular source in question, "Encyclopedia of Mathematics" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_June_27#Category:Relations; b) He and others (possibly including user Michael Hardy) have conspired to remove or rename Wikipedia article that i have created on "Relations" http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Translation_relation&action=history (this is an example of removing, with a redirect, good information from Wikipedia). The fact is that "Relations" do exist in Mathematics. There are many sources describing "Translational relation", including my own in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2009_June_27#Category:Relations , yet these users insist on depriving Wikipedia readers based on non-cooperative reasons; c) the edits done by these users on these related topics were done in haste with insufficient thought, as can be seen with reverts on my talk page history regarding Zermelo's Theorem/game theory. Please advise if you can. Henry Delforn ( talk) 23:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
In recognition of your excellent work in this area, I award you this much-deserved star. Great job improving the Richard Perry article too! :) œ ™ 02:56, 7 July 2009 (UTC) |
Hey there, I have a general copyright question about the project Medpedia ( http://www.medpedia.com/), it says in their licensing part of their terms page that they use the GNU Free Document License, but they don't specify which version, they only link to this page [12], so I was wondering if we could use some of their content and re-license it as cc-by-sa under the licensing clause as we did with our GFDL content? Because I was wondering that if we could it would be a great source of medical related articles and information for Wikipedia (Oh, and I was refered to you from The ed17 on IRC :) ). Thanks and All the Best, Mifter ( talk) 03:25, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Will you add something there about Paterson? We haven't got very far yet at all. Thanks. If you know any of the participants who haven't responded to the thread, if you could drop them a note that would be great. Dougweller ( talk) 11:51, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi there. Yeah I see that now on the talk alright, I've tagged with a cleanup-section instead. Sorry about that! Thanks! Fin © ™ 16:52, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your assistance with this problem. I genuinely appreciate your prompt and professional handling of the issues as they've arisen. Jinfo ( talk) 18:19, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanking you for your sugession, since i have floated number of Pages regaring towns and villages aroung Kanpur city in a very short time.
Most of the information were from india09.com (regarding description), fallingrain.com (regarging location and elevation), censusindia.gov.in, (regarding population) asi.nic.in (regarding Archaeological importance) and from official sites of Kanpur nagar district, Kanpur dehat district, Auraiya district and unnao district.
The description obtained from india09.com is very limited just two or three lines in any particular page. Presently it may appear i have copied them from a source. Here i would like to mention that these all pages are studs and they are just evolving as more information will be available the language will continue to change. At the same time i will try to change the style of what ever limited literature they have as suggested by you. Please further note each page have different sections and their information have been sourced from different sources as stated earlier.
I have not even tagged them as studs neither they have been catogerised nor there there is any extenal reference. It will be done.
But most have the information have been cross tallied from other websites also. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ramesh vyas ( talk • contribs) 17:34, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello from WP:WPO, where a question was raised yesterday about the synopsis for ( Macbeth (opera)). The synopsis, as well as a number of others, was originally copied (in 2005 or thereabouts) from a website called Opera Japonica). The copier ( User:Kleinzach) was in real life - and still is - Simon Holledge, the publisher of Opera Japonica and the author of the synopsis. He's on a wikibreak at the moment.
At the time (November 2005), one of the other synopses (that for I Capuleti e i Montecchi) was spotted as a copyvio, and there was some dialogue between Kleinzach and two or three admins which resulted in Kleinzach attaching a statement to that synopsis (and to the other ones that he'd authored and copied) stating that the copying had been done "with permission". The permission was, of course, granted by himself as author and publisher to himself as WP editor. There is an unnumbered OTRS tag attached to the Capuleti/Montecchi Talk page, but not, we think, to any of the others, and it looks as if WP procedures weren't properly followed by OTRS people at the time. We at the Opera Project are concerned that copyvio tags may be slapped without warning on any or all of the synopses, and we'd like to regularise the situation, preferably with the aid of numbered OTRS tags or whatever else may be deemed necessary. I'm about to move the "with permission" statements from the bottom of the synopses to footnotes, but that won't solve the problem.
We will be grateful for your input on this. The discussion that we've had at the Opera Project is here. Feel free to reply direct to me and/or, if you think it's appropriate, add your thoughts to the discussion on the above page. Meanwhile, I'm emailing Kleinzach to put him in the picture. Thanks in advance for any help or guidance that you can give us. -- Guillaume Tell 21:42, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
A person with the user name The Younger removed text and sources, claiming that he "tidied up the article, edited some apparantly biased language". He replaced the sources with Citation needed tags. I restored the original version and reapplied a couple of valid changes he had made. Today he revised a paragraph, gutting most of the factual detail from the sources. I don't want to get into an edit war, but it seems like this person has an ax to grind. I value your opinion. Would you review this and tell me if I should back off? Mgreason ( talk) 23:27, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
FYI. - Dank ( push to talk) 03:21, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for note, and the kind words. And thanks, too, for (as always) doing such a great job in your role as admin and investigating the matter. I'll be sure to keep what you posted at the talk page in mind (that starting out different at Wikipedia and converging might signal a reverse coypvio). TwilligToves ( talk) 03:26, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2008/02/25/jewish-nobel-laureates-11590-more-than-population-statistics-might-expect/ Jewish Nobel Laureates: 11590% More Than Population Statistics Might Expect By Scott Thong —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 13:05, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Invisible Barnstar | |
I hereby award you the Invisible Barnstar for your diligent work on the English Wikipedia. I had only recently become aware of you when you helped me with the article Deep Eddy Pool. Thank you so much for collaborating on such a worthy project as the wikipedia. People like you assure that when I encounter a person that doesn’t use the wikipedia because of factual verifiability, I can show them, no look, it is referenced! Dillard 421♂♂ ( talk to me) 15:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC) |
Also :)...
Dillard 421♂♂ ( talk to me) 15:37, 9 July 2009 (UTC)
Call me slow, MRG, by all means, but...when I come across a copyvio article and think, "the author really needs to send through an OTRS notification of ownership of copyright, since most likely the author owns the copyright", I stumble around blindly looking for a page of explanation to which to direct the author. Wikipedia:OTRS does not seem a suitable place to send someone. Worse, exactly how do you send an OTRS email to the WMF? The Wikipedia:OTRS advises "Please see our "Contact Us" page". But that page does list an obvious contact email.
Forgive me laying this on you, but do you have any knowledge of the advice & contact pages you'd point a user towards in this circumstance? thanks, -- Tagishsimon (talk) 11:07, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I'm contacting you as the admin who protected the page Frank Lapidus to ask if you would consider unprotecting it. Although the article was deleted for non-notability, I believe the version that existed at the time was entirely unsourced and a clear copyvio. I've written an article on the character in my userspace utilising reliable sources which I believe should meet the general notability guideline, and would like to move it into the mainspace if at all possible. Thank you :) Frickative 14:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I think there are at least a few, if not more, copyvios at the article Expulsion of Germans after World War II. The first set of them occur in the section "Evacuation and flight to Denmark" - where a lot the text is taken almost verbatim from the Spiegel Online article [13]. For example Wiki-Article: "the refugees were interned in hundreds of camps from Copenhagen to Jutland, placed behind barbed wire and guarded by military personnel. The largest camp, located in Oksbøl on the west coast of Jutland, held 37,000 refugees." vs. Spiegel: "The refugees were interned in hundreds of camps from Copenhagen to Jutland, placed behind barbed wire and guarded by heavily armed overseers. The largest camp was located in Oksboll, on the west coast of Jutland, and had 37,000 detainees.". Or Wiki-Article: "Many of the refugees were women, children, or the elderly.[22] A third of the refugees were younger than 15 years old" vs. Spiegel: "And most were women, children or elderly. A third of the refugees were younger than 15 years old". Most of the rest of the sentences in this section are also more or less verbatim. The second batch of copyvio's appears in the "Poland" [14] section where the sentences reffed to the Gibney and Hansen book [15] are also verbatim, more or less. There might also be some based on the source The Expulsion of 'German' Communities from Eastern Europe at the end of the Second World War by Prausser and Rees but I haven't had time to check everything in that one carefully.
The same problem (with the Gibney and Hansen book) appears also in Flight and expulsion of Germans from Poland during and after World War II.
I'm not sure what the proper steps are if the article has possible multiple copyright issues. Should it be tagged with a template? radek ( talk) 01:36, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
I FOUND ANOTHER 15 WEBSITES,WITH THE SAME INFORMATOIN BY GOOGLE SEARCH.-- 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 07:41, 10 July 2009 (UTC) ARE THEY ALL CRIMINALS ,AND ONLY WIKIPEDIA OBEYS THE LAW OF COPYRIGHT???-- 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 07:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
ALL THE 15 WEBSITES, AGREES ABOUT 160 WINNERS,AND THE FEW THAT LEFT (19 WINNERS), CAN BE EASILLY,DETECTED IF THEY ARE JEWS (BY GOOGLE SEARCH),SO ALL THE INFORMATION IS MINE,AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH JINFO.ORG. -- 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 18:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
-- 217.132.41.129 ( talk) 18:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Could you enlighten us? =) P.S. Love the user talk:MRG. Much easy to get to you and bug you with stuff like this <evil grin> – xeno talk 18:58, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi I've had an editor now that has continued to harrass my talk page after numerous attempts to communicate there are still problems. The editor Badagnani has spammed my talk page with accusations for a while now. See this [16] and now after several attempts continues to revert my edits here [17] without discussion. My edits are constantly being followed by reverts from this editor. Please take action, Thank you. Sea888 ( talk) 19:04, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the lead on that one and getting it done. I was a bit out of my depth on that one. Best wishes, -- TeaDrinker ( talk) 21:29, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for informing me and for your constructive criticism. I already read the written exchanges you made with Drmies and I now understand the reasons why the affected section should be deleted. With your advice, I'll see to it that I would not commit the same mistake again. -- JinJian ( talk) 21:32, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, hope you're well. I've come across this article, which looks to have at least one section taken from the publication: Dyer, Frederick Henry, A Compendium of the War of the Rebellion. 3 volumes. (New York: T. Yoseloff), 1908. (having been flagged as a cv of [18]). Now the guy doesn't have a WP article, and I can't find out when he died so what I'm wondering is whether this would be covered by the pre-1923 publication thing and therefore be PD? Can you shed any light on the situation? Cheers, – Toon 21:34, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I greatly appreciate all the effort that you put into understanding the issues involved and your patience in responding to the repeated provocations. Jinfo ( talk) 02:41, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed
Bertan1311 (
talk ·
contribs) had copied text from a review to
Fight Night Round 4 so I looked over his contribs and found that
Spetsnaz GRU had alot of text copied from various website as well as two-three books (though mainly from one). Could you look over it to see if I missed anything or otherwise messed up (though it's not much left to miss... What's left is simple statements and two one list (one of which, though parts of it is from one of the books, is heavily copy-edited as well as expanded and the other that is simple facts) and a paragraph on knives. I haven't looked closely at his other contribs but will try to do so now. Thanks, --
aktsu (
t /
c)
22:53, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
Don't we have the option to place the names of significant contributors on the talk page to satisfy the GFDL? Gigs ( talk) 18:26, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl. A possibly non-bold-noobish question:)... I was in the process of adding a copyvio template to the page Imam al-hussain as it seems to be pasted from http://www.al-islam.org/kaaba14/6.htm or possibly a source on the net that has copied it. In the meantime, another (cleverer ;)) editor has noticed that the subject is already covered in an existing article and has started an AfD nomination. The principle would seem to be to deal with copyvio swiftly to prevent propagation, but the AfD notice specifically requires that the article not be blanked. Should I leave the AfD process to take its course or add the copyvio template anyway? TheSmuel ( talk) 18:50, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
Thanks for your kind notice, and I do respect copyrights. Does it mean now though that the article can now remain on the site? Can I put in, not paraphrasing but in my own words, the numerous awards he gained (I don't think these awards needed to be published online for me to cite them; they are well known enough that I'm sure musicians who know about this know where the reliable source comes from), and his review of the CDs? You see, a lot of musicians are notable without the need to be boasted on the internet, so I would very much appreciate if Wikipedia editors understand this.
I've also noticed you've deleted the line "His CD of Brahms piano music has recently received excellent reviews and he has subsequently recorded an album of Schumann piano music for Delphian records, as well as a highly acclaimed album of Beethoven's "Emperor" Piano Concerto. " However, you can't really find this phrase in the soundtechniques.tv site; it's not copied from anywhere or paraphrased. It's quite funny actually because I added that myself, so I'm very surprised it got deleted. I would very much like it to be back on again if possible. Anyway thanks for your message and I'll keep the things you mentioned in mind.
Wtjulianchan ( talk) 14:21, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
Recently this article was deleted :(
Can you show me the source of the copyright problems? It should be readily accessible to people in a log since I couldnt find it. I am some-what new to wikipedia, so either Im a novice and can't find where the listed copyright problems are, or this is a terrible system in which articles with tons of referenced material are deleted by a few people who dont even source the material they are basing their decisions on.
Please help, thank you! Jatlas ( talk) 16:10, 11 July 2009 (UTC) Jatlas2 ( talk) 21:11, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
The source of copyright problems is a skimpy webpage, the deleted article was huge. It seems like it was totally inappropriate that the page was deleted... But I guess thats not really my concern. My concern is, I was hoping you could do me a big favor and grant me access to the deleted PSK article's reference section??? If that can be done I would happily recreate the article free of copyright problems. Please let me know if this can be done. Big Thanks Jatlas ( talk) 20:19, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
THANK YOU! :) Jatlas ( talk) 23:30, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
G8-able, or was this talk page deliberately left orphaned? – Toon 18:58, 12 July 2009 (UTC)
Yes, that would be a somewhat awkward conversation. On another note, I seem to remember you mentioning a decent plagiarism detection tool that you used; I've become rather disillusioned with the one I normally utilise, could you possibly point me towards it? It'd be much appreciated. – Toon 15:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I have got the copyright holders to send emails to wikipedia extending permission for the text on the Susan Hutchison page, What else needs to be done to clean it up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.19.58.80 ( talk) 19:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
If you want to restore it I won't stop you. I just noticed using ones besides the default wpbiography seems to break some stats or scripts. Granted, I'm probably the only person that looks at/uses them for all I know. Wizardman 00:50, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl,
As asked I've added the sources where the quotes were written. Hope that all this will finally solve the problem about the conflict of interest. Thank you very much for all your help. -- Exeko ( talk) 15:44, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi again Moonriddengirl,
I've changed the whole text giving it a more neutral view. There are references and sources too. Could you please tell me if it's correct now and if it matches with Wikipedia's policy. One final question, do I have to give also a permission for the new text, knowing that I already gave one for the old text and that the sources are the same?
Thanks again. I hope that this issue will finally be solved and that I won't have to bother you again ;).-- Exeko ( talk) 14:48, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
permissions-en@wikimedia.org. In the body of your letter (but not the subject), please mention ticket # 2009032410050969 and explain that you are writing to grant permission for the original text added and for recent additions under those two licenses. You don't want to put the ticket # in the subject, because that would send it to the French Wikipedia's queue, and you need it connected to the English language Wikipedia. If you leave a note here letting me know when you have sent that letter, I will try to intercept it so that we can expedite it. If another agent picks it up, it will still be handled in good order but may take a few days. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:26, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I've just send the mail to grant permission for the text. I corrected a few things in the text. Thank you for your time and help. -- Exeko ( talk) 19:01, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you with a question on an article you've never contributed to and probably wouldn't be interested in reading but I felt you would be the best person to ask with regard a copyright issue. On the above article a user added some text copied from various sources, I reverted those additions on my basic understanding that it was a copyright violation, that user has now re-added the material with an edit summary of 'Share Alike Lincece 3.0 taken. So this information has legal right to publish'.
As I say I only have basic knowledge of copyright law so don't know if this is a reasonable claim but the adding of material straight from a source without a sign of permission or a sign the source has released the text under a license doesn't seem right to me. Could you take a look and offer a more informed view? -- Jpeeling ( talk) 17:42, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
I see you've linked to a java clock to provide people with the current UTC time. For those without java, wikipedia can actually provide the current time itself, using the {{CURRENTTIME}} directive. The last time this page was updated in cache was at 03:00 UTC.
The only downside is the need for an &action=purge (see: User:Kim_Bruning/servertime) -- Kim Bruning ( talk) 16:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl; you're da bomb! Mgreason ( talk) 17:22, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, you seem to be a guru on copyright questions; would you mind taking a look at my opinion in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artificial robot organism and letting me know whether I've correctly interpreted the situation with regard to the article? I hate copyvios, which I seem to be running into ever more often around here, and I'd appreciate any enlightenment you may be able to offer. Deor ( talk) 04:08, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
I have a new article for your consideration, at User:Mgreason/Sandbox 1. Thanks! Mgreason ( talk) 14:00, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Oh, how dreadful, I had mixed feelings about posting this because of your adminship, but...order a bunch of the top 100 movies? Hope all goes well for you. Best wishes, Novickas ( talk) 18:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Should this article have some note about its initial content coming from aspirin? If so...how to do that best? Thanks! Frank | talk 19:11, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Happy editing!
Hi,
I have in fact had record reviews published in Spin and Maxim UK, and have appeared on Fox News' Red Eye as a music news commentator ten different times in the past nine months. I'm chagrined that you removed all of my review links. It really was not a very nice thing to do.
Mark Prindle —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.53.63 ( talk) 06:48, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I'm back to pester you. Stumbling across this article, added December 2008 using a lot of text from an external source that they released via OTRS under the GFDL. I'm a little hazy about the specifics of what GFDL content we can and cannot accept, so would you be able to take a look? Presumably gaining a release for the CC-BY-SA would be reasonably strightforward if necessary. Either way, there is an issue with the GFDL release statement at the bottom of the article. Your attention is much appreciated. – Toon 13:29, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
I've been offline for a while and an entry I worked on is gone. Can you please point me towards the problem so I can try and address it? Is the original page completely gone, gone? Or can I see an old version and try to resolve the problem. Thanks!
Warning: You are recreating a page that was previously deleted.
You should consider whether it is appropriate to continue editing this page. The deletion and move log for this page are provided here for convenience:
00:29, 14 July 2009 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Anonymous Constellation" (Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for over seven days)
Cheers, Wolfboy21 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wolfboy21 ( talk • contribs) 17:00, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. What is currently the best practice for dealing with a copy violation by a new user? I have handled a recent case this way. -- Geronimo20 ( talk) 21:31, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I see you are an OTRS member, so perhaps you would look at the uploads of Evpope. Two are currently up for deletion File:ScottSystemShoreline.jpg and File:ScottSystemShoreline.jpg and I see that a different one File:Scott System cacti.jpg already has an OTRS ticket. I suggested that she supply confirmation through the OTRS permission system before I saw the ticket in the older image. Because all the images are from the same company, I think we can rescue them all by applying this ticket to all which I understand is possible. I think the intention is that all images should be freely licenced by the company through the uploader, a company employee but she may need to confirm that. TIA ww2censor ( talk) 22:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
I happen to have found an article that was a copy of another article, the former I deleted, the latter is Against All Odds, and I am concerned that it could be a copyright page; I have no proof, but my sixth sense is tingling...If you get a chance, could you look at the page? I would appreciate it. TomStar81 ( Talk • Some say ¥€$, I say NO) 00:43, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
I lifted both inspiration and some verbatim text from your edit notice. I did it because I unilaterally decided that your waiver for creative content you posted on my talk page would also apply to this. :) MLauba ( talk) 11:52, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Did you ever get a chance to look at Mshahidnawaz9's about 60 images that I mentioned here which all look suspect to me. TIA ww2censor ( talk) 17:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
←I've started a new PUI listing. For my own convenience, I'm listing some here that I think may be his, as I think perhaps his username might connect him with these people:
Everything else I've found (I'm starting on the bottom) is at PUI. Which is overwhelming it. :/ -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:53, 15 July 2009 (UTC)
Duh. I finally found out why so many of the week-old WP:SCV reports I had been looking at this week had been sorted by you and your peers from WP:CP without ever having been tagged with {{ copyvio}}. I never realized that DumbBot was copying CSB noms to WP:CP. Sometimes I'm dense like concrete. MLauba ( talk) 14:47, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
...me again. Can you comment on my handling of Peter of Juilly earlier today? In a nutshell, it was created as a copyvio, tagged by Coren's bot, and then rewritten by the original creator in a temp space. That seemed sufficient in my view to delete the original under G12 and replace it with the rewritten version, case closed. Yes/no/maybe? Frank | talk 16:44, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Great - thanks both! Frank | talk 22:56, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Happy editing!
I'm not quite back yet -- still on the road -- just checked in for a brief WP fix the other day. Considering the problems that CP issues can cause, I'm surprised that you are the only admin weeding through that little jungle. Without you, there is no doubt it would be a completely overgrown disaster. For some oddball reason, I kind of like playing around in there. (Maybe the same oddball reason it appeals to you? Could it just be obligation? Sense of duty? Or is it some sort of internet masochism? Penance? Nah, who knows.) Anyway, I'm still leaving the more difficult problems for you to handle. I was glad you mentioned the User:Moonriddengirl/cup template, and I've now bookmarked a few of your other gems User:Moonriddengirl/frequently used templates and User:Moonriddengirl/Copyright cleanup). And will continue to follow your lead. I won't be back until the end of July, but you can count on my help. Feel free to give me a shout anytime. — CactusWriter | needles 20:13, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello....I'm am responding to the Victor di Suvero copyright issue....I'm sorry that I have not been able to respond sooner. I am the administrative assistant at Pennywhistle Press and I have full authority to grant anyone in the book permission to reprint or use any part of the "We Came to Santa Fe" book. Therefore, I give Wikipedia permission to use any part of "We Came to Santa Fe" in the Victor di Suvero article. Thank you. If you have any questions, please feel to contact me at <redacted contact information>.
Can you please respond to at one of the emails above so that I know the issue has or has not been cleared up. I appreciate it very much.
Brandywine Avila Pennywhistle Press —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vdisuvero ( talk • contribs) 21:14, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello....(I am not sure if I'm doing this correctly either!)
I'm am responding to the Victor di Suvero copyright issue....I'm sorry that I have not been able to respond sooner. I am the administrative assistant at Pennywhistle Press and I have full authority to grant anyone in the book permission to reprint or use any part of the "We Came to Santa Fe" book. Therefore, I give Wikipedia permission to use any part of "We Came to Santa Fe" in the Victor di Suvero article. Thank you. If you have any questions, please feel to contact me at <redacted contact information>.
Can you please respond to at one of the emails above so that I know the issue has or has not been cleared up. I appreciate it very much.
Brandywine Avila Pennywhistle Press Vdisuvero ( talk) 21:16, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
I want to ask why did you deleted my Article. (Arthur Sarkissian) what can i do to open it? pleaseeeeeeeeeeee help me! Arthur Sarkissian is well known painter in armenia and over world please look what can you do! and ples let me add that Article THX! Vahan you can write me an e mail <contact information redacted>
Thank you for keeping the article, and overriding it with the content of the temporary page. Otumba ( talk) 15:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
User_talk:MBisanz#deletion, it deals with a G12 of yours that I did the G8 cleanup on that it looks like the person re-created. Leaving to your judgment. MBisanz talk 09:00, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi MRG - I saw at least one article ( Tariff-rate quota) listed by Corenbot at the cpv page for including material published by this source. Since it's public domain, would it be OK if I created {{ CRS}} under US Govt Public Domain templates to cover this situation? Regards, Novickas ( talk) 13:22, 22 July 2009 (UTC)
See here. Cheers, -- aktsu ( t / c) 14:24, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I wonder if I could request your expertise on a subject I've raised here, regarding a possible copyvio thingy (your name was recommended). Thanks very much, Ranger Steve ( talk) 20:02, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Although I've seen your name a lot, I don't think we've ever interacted, so I'm surprised you noticed. Many thanks :-) ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I understand your need to delete the page based on the following. The creation of this page was my initial foray into this and I had to temporarily leave it and before getting back had figured the resemblance of text to the original was probably the problem. Your deletion of this confirmed this. However, I am actually the editor-in-chief of this journal and a friend of mine heads the e-century publishers that host the journal. So I don't think getting the formal copyright approval will be an issue - just as a novice I am not entirely sure what I need to provide. Sorry to be a nuisance-- MolecEpidemiolFan ( talk) 23:12, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry if I have inadvertently started a different thread, I tried and failed to find a way to respond further to your helpful clarification on what I need to do re copyright. If I re-draft the page then in (an other version of;-) my words (as I provided the text content for the ijmeg pages) will this allow the page to be visible again rather than it be locked? thanks again.-- MolecEpidemiolFan ( talk) 23:30, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
Ok Moonriddengirl - how did I do this time round its called exactly the same (hope its not a problem!) - can you check and if ok make it go "live"? I have another page I am writing now to also link to it if possible. thanks again for the speedy reply! —Preceding unsigned comment added by MolecEpidemiolFan ( talk • contribs) 00:32, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi I am running out of steam at the moment to be able to complete the additional references for the IJMEG and e-century pages I have just created. Will they remain live for a few days to give me chance to enhance them or do they no run the risk of deletion?-- MolecEpidemiolFan ( talk) 01:02, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Roger Davies asked me to write up a four- to six-paragraph description of what plagiarism is and how to avoid plagiarism for the MilHist Academy. Would you mind looking over the reduction of our dispatch that I've constructed? I would appreciate it. Awadewit ( talk) 03:25, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
←It flows very nicely. You've distilled it in a way that it isn't obvious that there are huge chunks missing. :) It seems a bit long still, if six-paragraphs is your limit, depending on how you count it. I come up with roughly 11. Tightening wording could reduce some paragraphs at the expense of some eloquence.
Under paraphrasing and summarizing, you might want to consider combining those two into one paragraph, since the first gives a level of detail that may not be necessary for practical application—perhaps like:
Adapting source text, whether by paraphrasing or summarizing (similar techniques that differ in level of detail), is a complex skill, and contributors to Wikipedia need to be alert to the potential for inadvertent plagiarism. Many editors believe that by changing a few words here or there—or even by changing a great number of the words found in the original source—they have avoided plagiarism. This is not necessarily the case. Nor does the mere rearrangement of clauses, sentences, or paragraphs avoid the problem.
For brevity, I might remove the "good" paraphrase example and simply refer to the full dispatch for more.
It seems like the last section could be tightened. Hmmm. I think statements like "This can be done either in hard copy or by using an electronic filing system." may be unnecessarily detailed for a short overview. Also, I realize that the more formal language was desired for the dispatch, but I wonder if switching out "you" for "editors" might make this easier for general reading. It's an intimidating subject for some people, and a friendlier, less formal approach, might help. :) Trying to get it all into one paragraph, I come up (quickly) with the following:
You can minimize the tendency to reuse text through several approaches, including proper note taking and using multiple sources. You might find it more difficult to avoid following that text too closely if you rely on only one source, as you will necessarily be limited to the details it presents. You will also find it more difficult to rewrite if you copy and paste text from your sources directly into your working drafts. Instead, you should (1) locate several sources, where possible; (2) assemble and organize notes and excerpts from these sources by topic; (3) read and absorb this material; and (4) write a draft version, in you own words and under your own organizational schema, of each topic. There are a number of ways to organize material; you should not closely follow a source's structure, either in overall organization, or in the composition and arrangement of sentences and paragraphs within each section. When you're finished, compare your draft with you source material to be sure you haven't accidentally used the author's original words. If you will not have easy access to original sources when you finish writing your final draft, you might find it useful (when taking original notes for your own use) to take them verbatim, with quotation marks, so you can see at a glance what language the original author used.
These ideas are, of course, off the top of my head. :) They aren't as elegant in construction as our original, but I'm trying to think of ways to boil this down to a simple "how to" that fits within that brief four-to-six paragraphs without losing any of the essential points.
Having suggested some removals, with this—"enclosed within quotation marks"—you might want to add something like "or in block quote". Working at WP:Plagiarism tells me that some people would want this acceptable alternative spelled out. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Zoom on a ticket, then for each line you have a link labeled (plain) : |-> 1. customer (email-external)(plain) John Doe <john.doe@isp.com>: OTRS Application Live. Cheers, guillom 07:49, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi there Moon
Is it possible to create a montage of CC-BY 2.0, CC-BY-SA 2.0, CC-BY-SA 2.5, and CC-BY-SA 3.0 images and license the result with CC-BY-SA 3.0, or somehow just declare the respective images and their licenses? I'd imagine that there should be some way to do this.
Image in question is
File:Toronto Montage 2.jpg, built from
1
2
3
4
5
6
7.
Thanks & Cheers,
Amalthea
08:44, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
I have had a go at a clean version at Talk:Robert Henry Cain/Temp. Could you possibly take a look when you have got time? Thanks, Woody ( talk) 17:51, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
Happy editing!
![]() |
The Gastropod-star | |
Moonriddengirl, for all the hard work you and your team put into WikiProjectGastropods, saving 1,000 of our articles, I award you this Barnstar. Invertzoo ( talk) 13:29, 26 July 2009 (UTC) |
![]() |
A piece of Jimbo's star | |
For the hard effort you put into helping make WikiProjectGastropods as great as it is, I award you a nice-sized chunk of the barnstar that Jimbo gave us on July 25 2009. This piece has a diamond in it! Invertzoo ( talk) 12:40, 26 July 2009 (UTC) |
Hi Monnriddengirl,
First of all congratulation on your award. I just wanted to know if you had the time to read and control the changes on the Wayne Schoenfeld article. And wanted to know if the changes are yet good enough in order to delete the conflict of interest. Thank you for your help and time. -- Exeko ( talk) 14:42, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. Woops! yes it is one I missed, see User:Philip Baird Shearer/BCWs copyright issues, for an overview. You might like to read Talk:James Temple#Copyleft problem to join in the conversation on Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems#James Temple -- PBS ( talk) 15:04, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello - Exinda recently updating our listing with revised content. My understanding is that there was a previous posting that you had concerns about copyright issues. It appears that the second posting was also deleted but I'm not exactly sure. We're keen to get new appropriate content posted. Can you please clarify for me? Our writer is out of town this week and I'm following up on his behalf.
tx Krista Burns Marketing Director Exinda Inc.
38.112.106.62 ( talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:39, 27 July 2009 (UTC).
Thank you for your assistance in developing this page to meet Wiki standards. Your help is greatly appreciated. Clftruthseeking ( talk) 18:41, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
You may want to consider changing <pulling out stuff that is making my page really wide> so that the link works equally well for users of the secure and non-secure servers. Thanks.— C45207 | Talk 03:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl, I don't know if you remember me but how have you been? Hey could you check out this users edits, he has been adding and removing information which seems to be with a racial intent on the articles related to the northern regions of Sri Lanka such as Northern Province, Sri Lanka , Mannar District and others. I have told him to stop vandalising the page but he continues, and has used unreliable sources like this [30], he also seems to be a member of WikiProject Sri Lanka. I have also told him to explain his edits on the talk page before he edits the article, and it is turning into a edit war. Could you please tell this person to stop his vandalism and follow the proper wikipedia protocaol. Thanks Blackknight12 ( talk) 06:44, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello,
I know you are trust worthy so I have an important task that I would like you to do for WikiProject Eurovision, a project I am a member of. There has been a lot of controvery on the project regarding what sources are reliable and which are not, and as a result I opened an RfC to try and settle the issue. It has now been going for over a month and seems to have run out of steam, with a straw poll held towards the end to see how opinions are spread out. There is a lot to read through and I think it would be best if someone impartial interpretes any consensus that has been formed, and I think you meet the criteria for that. I would like you if you could spare the time to write a conclusion on each source given making the verdict you think is most appropriate weighing up the spread of opinion, arguements, and ultimatly consensus. Possible verdicts for each source include no consensus, not reliable, semi-reliable, and reliable. If you don't have time I can always find someone else to do it instead, many thanks in any case. Camaron · Christopher · talk 08:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
This version [31] of Wong Doc-Fai was copyvio from [32] - are the changes sufficient? I've been asked and although I think they probably are, I'd like a second opinion. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 20:46, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
I thought you made an excellent summing up of the discussion. Jezhotwells ( talk) 15:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Your closure was well justified and was along the lines on how I expected it to be. Yes you were right on what a semi-reliable source was, and correctly highlighted the limits of polling and the problems with it on a non-yes or no issue such as reliable sourcing. I had not thought of evolution, but yes you are probably right that many of these sources are evolving, particularly ESCToday. With the RfC off the project's chest we can now address other issues. Thank you again and I hope to see you around in the future. Camaron · Christopher · talk 20:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I am not sure whether Edward Balliol really did have copyright problems. IIRC, the For the Lion author contributed a fair bit to the article, so he may well have reused some favourite phrases ... but perhaps I am being stupid? Angus McLellan (Talk) 19:14, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Thanks... for your suggestions —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlueLankan ( talk • contribs) 19:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
I responded to your note on Talk:Albert Fish regarding the release date of the documentary in January 2009 vs. the good article status date of February 2007 and content stability since that time. There is no validity to a claim of copyright infringement regarding this article and I would request that my statement be forwarded to those in charge of determining this. Thanks. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 20:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Any thoughts about this image, just added to Rickey Henderson? I found this and this (many copies) which are similar but not identical. User:Quadell hasn't been around for several days; any advice how to proceed? Frank | talk 23:43, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
An anon IP continues to remove your template from Albert Fish. I have a bit of trouble verifying this because I don't see exactly where the vio is. I'd appreciate it if you'd take a look. I've warned the editor a few times now. Shadowjams ( talk) 09:31, 29 July 2009 (UTC)
Many thanks for your feedback. It's my first time making an update, so I very much appreciate your help. I'm going to attempt to repost, bearing in mind the notes you made about the previous attempt. Congrats on the recognition! Eeness ( talk) 14:30, 29 July 2009 (UTC)Eeness
Do you think This was lifted from here? – xeno talk 00:26, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm the guy who only calls when he needs some money, or a ride, or some copyvio help... ;) MRG, would you mind having a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alabama Department of Public Health (ADPH) and the associated article? I placed a copyvio template on it, but one editor wonders if that's correct, and I'm not 100% sure myself. Your cash, your Cadillac, and your time are, as always, appreciated! Drmies ( talk) 01:19, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
It's good that OTRS now directs clearly to Wikipedia:Contact us, but it misses an option for those who want to give us permission to use non-photo content. Also, see my comments here, and here. If we want people to give us free stuff we should make it as easy and friendly as possible... Btw, feel free to repost my comment to some forum - I am not sure however where this could be. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 03:23, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
Albert Fish, could not possibly be a film by John Borowski. The Holmes-Pitezel Case, by Detective Frank P. Geyer, whereabouts was in Philadelphia. The Albert Fish Case, whereabouts, was in New York City. What happened to Ms. Grace Budd is flat out more enlightening when one reads the same did not happen to Edward. One should always keep in mind that it was Detective Frank P. Geyer who was on the case in New York City. Philly is not far from where Edward Budd was taken from us. Same with Billy Gaffney, except I came under the direct impression Billy Gaffney is really Edward Budd. John Borowski can go figure his own point out. The clencher is Black Mass by Lehr and O'Neill, not Portrait of Evil I would think by Borowski, which has alot more to do about the Budd and Pitezel case than about the Benjamin and Albert case. My big problem is staying focussed on the fact Howard did not deserve to die, his sister did not play well with him. LAMMERGRIFFIN ( talk) 03:46, 30 July 2009 (UTC)
...for keeping a watch over my talk page. I really do appreciate you stepping in and providing opinion. And, yeah, as you notice, I'm finally back at home now -- totally jet-lagged, but that doesn't seem to affect the quality of my edits (hmm, that ain't a good sign). If you've noticed any screw-ups on my CV edits, or anything I should consider, please drop me a note -- I'm still feeling my way through the proper process. By the way, this simple gem shows you may be the calmest, kindest, most even-keeled person around here -- or on a permanent lithium drip. Not sure which, but I am consistently impressed. — CactusWriter | needles 08:23, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
...of Amity University from a copyvio point of view? Compare http://www.careernews4u.com/amity-university.html and first section. Since it's just the first section, how to fix this issue? I removed an entire section of current events which wasn't encyclopedic to start with and also had some copyvio content. Thanks! Frank | talk 10:20, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl!! I´am an one of Freemason project´s member and since one/two months ago, i uploaded an image from Boaz and Jachin ( talkpage) (not exactly the real one, on porpose to just showing a replica of the pillars) [38], yesterday, one guy took off the image in all available languages articles, and the in french page of Boaz and Jachin, the "anonymous person" took out as well in the top page, which was, "This is the part of series of Freemason" (in french language), the person who made this, argued also : "....your image in some languages of Wikipedia and inappropriate manner, which does not tolerate. Any serious researcher believes that the columns were not Masonic." and modified the category of my image uploaded... my question is, is this true?!? The guy is a skeptical person... Really.. i don´t no the reason what he did this...
Regards. Lightwarrior2 ( talk) 23:00, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar | |
For not just your tireless and inspiring work on copyright problems but also from slaving through the histpurge backlog with the old and impractical diff parameter (now gone). MLauba ( talk) 16:36, 31 July 2009 (UTC) |
Hi and thanks again for your efforts regarding the Fish and Holmes articles. I came across a website not long ago, and a page in particular there, about Billy the Kid. It looked quite familiar to me and when I looked further, discovered the article posted is a duplicate of a version of our Billy the Kid from mid-2006. It is marked as a copyright, 1998 & 2006, but it doesn't give attribution to Wikipedia at all, and it's clear that's where they got it. I haven't looked at the other pages they have listed, but thought I would eventually. I sent a letter to the owner of the site, noting that attribution is supposed to be given under the license we use, but didn't get a response. What I'm wondering is whether there is anything that should be done about it, and if so, what. Thanks. Wildhartlivie ( talk) 17:54, 31 July 2009 (UTC)
'Fair cop Guv'. I was feeling lazy and just re-arranged things and the odd word, I will try again sometime unless someone beats me to it. The real problem is that there are very few sources with anything other than a very brief description, so I am forced to use only what is available and my literary talents get pushed to the limit, or I just get plain lazy. Thanks for the advice and the vigilance. Petebutt ( talk) 06:44, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Greetings, Moonriddengirl:
I've got a new article for review:
User:Mgreason/Sandbox 3
No big hurry; I see you've been staying busy. Thanks!
Mgreason (
talk)
20:23, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi.
Is there a problem if i use links to sites in spanish as refs for the english wikipedia? Zidane tribal ( talk) 01:19, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for understanding the potential plausability of that redirect. I hope clear heads prevail through this massive deletionism campaign. Tyciol ( talk) 10:56, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
I am only finding 2k results for this collection of words, which was simply a typo by Tyciol in the first place. That's less than 1% of the results for the whole name. I've never seen anyone actually refer to the series without "Rider" in the name, usually it's the whole name, or just "Ryuki".— Ryūlóng ( 竜龙) 11:15, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl! I wanted to ask for some advice. A user claiming on his/her userpage to represent Devendra Banhart's management repeatedly removes reliably sourced article content without valid reason or discussion. Do I post this on WP:COIN, because despite the corporate username (Lookout Management) I can't proove that this is a corporate identity and not just someone claiming to be. Similar changes went on from IP addresses for some time. Could you be so nice look over User_talk:Lktmgmt and give thoughts on what best to do? Thank you very much. Hekerui ( talk) 19:11, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Belated thanks for your excellent edit on this, which I have only just read. Hugh Mason ( talk • contribs 10:26, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Mrg. I was checking today's Copyvio listings and ran across some more of your Paknur project. (What did you ever do to deserve that lovely bit of punishment?) I saw one note at Talk:Qilla Abdullah District and wanted to let you know that I had investigated the Om Gupta Encyclopaedia of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh a couple of months ago and determined it was copied from Wikipedia. (My discussions are here and here. I removed all references to that text from WP -- and knew I should have followed it up with a wider notification. Sorry. I hope this hasn't screwed up anything for you. — CactusWriter | needles 11:13, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
Should you have a free moment at some point, feel free to weigh in at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Allstarecho in regards to the copyvio concern as well as the past but recent copyvio issue we went through. I've been quite careful in regards to copyvio and close paraphrasing but someone else seems to think otherwise. Considering our history, I feel it best to let you speak about it and my efforts in helping right my wrongs. - ALLST✰R▼ echo wuz here 11:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)