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 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 |
Hi Moonriddengirl!
I have a question about a copyright concern in the dogfight article. If a single sentence has been copied word for word from the source, would that be grounds for removal? Zaereth ( talk) 18:54, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
You're correct, that was an unfortunate oversight. I was kind of nudged to create the new page by comments on my FA nomination and forgot attribution, because I haven't copied Wiki material to create a new article before. I took notice for the future.
Hey, you're big on copyright, could you perhaps take a look at an issue in the nomination, there was a question about files used, which I answered but despite me asking for feedback the user raising the issue hasn't responded and nothing gets moving until this is answered in some way. Thank you. Hekerui ( talk) 21:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
I put a notice on ANI regarding the legal threat on Talk:Devils Diciples. -- Dbratland ( talk) 02:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Ahh... I never thought of that! I'll definitely keep it in mind in the future. (this is why I need the admin tools!) :-) Thanks! The leftorium 14:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I have another question. What should be done with Jhala and Jhala (clan)? Part of the Jhala article was copied to the Jhala (clan) article without attribution. Thanks, The leftorium 20:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey again Moonriddengirl. Could you take a look at John Todd (occultist) for me? It was deleted from Wikipedia a year ago and User:Ian.thomson restored it a few days ago, but I'm not sure if he was the original creator of that text. Thank you, The leftorium 17:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I feel really bad for bothering you again (I won't do it as often from now on!), but I was just wondering if you could confirm this (see User talk:Ser Amantio di Nicolao). I don't know much about public domain, and a whole bunch of articles by that user has been listed at WP:SCV. Many thanks! :) The leftorium 21:39, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi MRG, thanks so far. I have been urged by Franamax to first identify possible copyvios, and made a first plan, see User:Mdd#First identify possible copyvios. In short I propose to tag all my suspicious articles with a copypaste-template on top or in a section. I would appreciate your feed back on this (first) idea. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker ( talk) 12:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, could you take a look at this? I don't doubt he was given permission to upload the images, but is it fine without an explicit statement of being freely licensed (not just uploaded here) and without evidence of it? Thanks, -- aktsu ( t / c) 02:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey MRG, just responding to your question about the Ram Narayan images. Hekerui had the right idea but their explanations were a bit off.
Hope this helps. :-) Dcoetzee 06:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, just noticed you removed some copyright material from Asia-Pacific Song Contest 2010. For once, I am proud to also notice it wasn't me that added the material in the first place (phew!). This link shows it was someone called Senseimatthew who did it back in April 2009. And by the looks of it, this editor inserted several pieces of copyrighted material into the article for months following. I'll take a look at what was removed, and re-work on it, if that's ok?! P.S. did you get chance to see that Lostock Hall one in the end? I think I'm starting to get the hang of this, and the article looks better than ever before lol. Anyways, take care, and I'll catch you around wiki-world soon. Pr3st0n ( talk) 21:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I came upon this edit to the subject article while watching recent changes. I Googled the text and got several hits. However, I don't know where the text originated and so am not sure if there exists a copyvio. I know it's a huge gray area and I'm not asking for miracles. I'm just hoping that your experienced eye will pick up something definitive that will tip the scales one way or the other. Apologies if I'm ringing the alarm bell over nothing. Thanks for your time. Tide rolls 05:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
may be asserted in error by the publisher, and that's concerning. The thought of that makes my head ache, though...I'll have enough challenges without seeing ghosts behind every door. Regards Tide rolls 15:22, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Can information released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 1.0 license be used on Wikipedia (see Haga Haga)? If not, could we add that to the table in Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright? The leftorium 15:37, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you take a look at the history of Tina Knowles? I'm not sure if User:Brenntagee was the original creator of that text. Thanks, The leftorium 22:56, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | ||
I give you the Special Barnstar for being extremely helpful and kind to other edtiors, and for your work with copyright violations. It's very appreciated! :) The leftorium 13:01, 11 October 2009 (UTC) |
I hope you are doing well. Thanks so much for the note about the email, I did not know that. I wanted to point out that I think you forgot to actually physically delete it, because it is still there. So I wanted to let you know, so that you could delete it yourself, so that the edit history would sort of make sense. Good luck and bless you for all the hard work you do to keep Wikipedia free from copyvio. As you know, I still am very grateful indeed that you and your team enabled us to keep those 1,000 gastropod articles this spring instead of having to delete them. Best wishes, Invertzoo ( talk) 17:37, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi again, Thanks MRG! Best, Invertzoo ( talk) 16:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
User talk:IWazEre1 creating self promotion articles. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 12:05, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Got another one.... Switchflicker Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 12:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
CatWizard777 ( talk) 12:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC) Dear Moonriddengirl Donators I know are trying to put up a page on me, I should like to ask your help in this matter, as you have deleted my biographical information without (in my opinion) checking all original sources. We should like to work on this page under your guidelines, and get a hold on thsi page until such time as this is laid out in a satisfactory manner that suits you. Please advise
The donators are: atomaticshoes & Julie Rex
Sincerely Darryl Read www.darrylread.com
sorry that i wrongly thought you were in conflict with the blocked user, thought user was disrupted you. apologies. entry since corrected. Ecoman24 (talk page) 13:15, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I thought you may want to see this, VRTS ticket # 2009082510043322. It relates to that case that you ended up reviewing and closing out yourself. I believe it simply re-iterates the necessity of either using our provided copyright request forms, or clearly explaining the ramifications of free licensing, coupled with the necessity to have the copyright owner choose a license themselves, and fill out the consent form themselves. Not sure if there is anything that can/should be done here, but wanted to bring it to your attention. Thanks. - Andrew c [talk] 14:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi there MRG, feels like were nearly at the summit of the alphabet mountain! I have done re-editied versions of the blanked St. Paul's Church, Bedford, St. Peter's Church, Bedford and Stamford American International School articles. I have also re-worded the wobbly content in Society of Headmasters & Headmistresses of Independent Schools and Sudbury (HM Prison), and was wondering if the close paraphrasing tags on these 2 articles could now be removed? I have also added reworded versions of the paragraphs you removed in the Standford Hill (HM Prison) and Times & Citizen articles. As were nearly at the end please tell me if im getting the hang of this? :-) Bleaney ( talk) 23:14, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I did wonder whether this would be PD because of it's source but thought that I didn't know the ins and outs of the copyright of US government sources well enough to decide either way. If it wasn't PD for that reason I did wonder whether it would be PD because of age, but again I wasn't sure as US sources of that age seem to be in a weird situation, and that's why I mentioned it's age on the copyright page. Dpmuk ( talk) 12:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Just so you know, the article you locked was constantly vandalized by user User:LAz17. He claims to have consensus - more specific explanation of this "consensus" was given by him in the talk page "We by 80% overwhelmingly reject the gay parades, and along with that we reject this in the wikipedia article. Simple analogy, no?" That is not a valid way to create the consensus, in a case you don't know you can't make an analogy between personal rejection of gay parade and article on Wikipedia. The information that was removed was 100% unrelated to gay parades, it was about Vladimir Putin endorsement. While I tried to achieve compromise by arguments he kept on posting conspiracy theories - how this information was put into this article with intention to alter election results (?!). He also claimed that the content is irrelevant trying to make it look like a content dispute but another user posted several independent sources that covered the issue and I had intention to expand that to include the background and aftermath of that letter which caused stir in the political scene of Serbia. Finally he posted in Serbian "Samo da znas, dok srbi dobijaju otkaze, tadic daje stotine hiljade dinara pederima - sto to nestavis u clanak?" which translates as "Just so you know, while serbs are getting fired, tadic is giving hundreds of thousands of dinars to fags - why don't you put that into the article?" and though he claimed he used the word homosexual not fag it's not true. This kind of writing is not only irrelevant and made up it is also libelous to Tadic and insulting to homosexuals. Finally in the last ANI against this user admins said that if he continues his irrational behavior there will be a reaction however your reaction was to lock the article instead of blocking him for good (he has a history of of template warnings on his talk page, ANIs on him and even a temporary block for his behavior). Now I don't know if this is the way we want Wikipedia to go, that anyone can abuse it and to slander left and right and make us all look like idiots for giving him the right to vandalize the article while claiming that his consensus is actually the consensus against homosexuals and that his reasons are basically conspiracy theories?! One more thing - this is an ongoing issue with a user that has a history of such behavior so please don't try to downplay it and direct me to talk with him as we've been through all that, meaning all red lines, all fine attempts to solve issues with him by other users have failed, there is no more time for that, that has all been tried and didn't work.-- Avala ( talk) 15:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Not to mention that no one would respond to request to discuss conspiracy theories and other things that LAz17 insists on in every discussion.-- Avala ( talk) 18:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
←There is an "initialism" in English: TLDR. It seems to me to be a real concern. Some Wikipedians seem to agree. A 716-word note may not be your best bet at keeping the discussion active. Cutting to the core is likely to get you more responses. Contributors encountering a long chunk of text may well choose to move on to something less time consuming. This is undoubtedly one of the reasons why the page instructions call for us to be concise. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:57, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Latest quotes from LAz17 directed at me [6], "you are full of POV stuff.", "What the hell are you smoking? Get off of your cocain or whatever you are on.", "Your last sentence there is really appalling, reaking with extreme POV.", "Truely disgusting, what you are trying to do here.", "Look, we know you are a Tadic supporter. At least take your sick POV out.". Now even No such user is talking about blocking LAz17. Which editor will join from the NPOVN now? Tell me which one? Who wants to get involved only to be insulted left and right by some LAz17? I don't think that anyone will. Btw maybe you didn't read what I wrote before but LAz17 has a history of many warnings, many ANIs and even a temporary block, and your optimistic approach that we are all capable to sit down and talk has only brought that he is testing boundaries further and further. As an admin you now have to step in and protect me from such grave personal insults and respond for that if not for his previous writings.-- Avala ( talk) 09:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl! :) Could you take a look at the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya article (and the recently created Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Churu article)? They appear to be copyvios of this source, but I don't know how to find out if the Wikipedia version was published first. The leftorium 18:18, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Mrg. At User talk:Globe.explorer and Talk:Franca Batich, the editor says that they have sent two e-mails to Wikimedia. Could you check the OTRS office please? In the meantime, I've replaced the article with a stubbed version from the temp page and dropped the editor a note. Thanks :) — CactusWriter | needles 09:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, just want to check I'm not being stupid. My understanding is that copying an entire section, such as the lead, from one article into another, such they both have the text but only one the history, is against the (GFDL?) licence. Is that correct? Can anything be done to allow this, such as an edit summary that contains a link to the revision of the article being copied? I've found this happening at a lot of articles. Cheers, Verbal chat 10:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl - A quick question about the above: I've started working through the list and come across Carmencita (film). It looks from that page's history like you have already dealt with the copyright issue; is it safe to remove it from the list, or are there other steps to take? (Apologies if this is in the how-to!) --☇ Kateshortforbob talk☄ 14:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Can you take a peek at this picture and either comment or forward the request accordingly? Thanks! Frank | talk 14:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Tom McGehee is a new article at
User:Mgreason/Sandbox.
Mgreason (
talk) 15:29, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Dreams Come True is a new article at
User:Mgreason/Sandbox 3.
Mgreason (
talk) 15:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Mac Papers is a new article at User:Mgreason/Sandbox 5. Mgreason ( talk) 15:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your notice on LAz17 page. Please see this. He call me a "vandalizer" on article that i created, and also he accused me for a sockpuppetry, beacuse he disagree with argument given on Template talk:Urban Rail transportation in the former Yugoslavia. Can you please tell this guy to talk with me with normal. I'm not the vandalizer neither sockpuppet (i can prove with CU if neccesery). I just want to work on articles that interest me, without any accusations. Thnx in advance-- Ex13 ( talk) 20:15, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I have reponded to your message at Talk: Artinc. Thank You. Artinc ( talk) 21:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC).
Hey, just letting you know I've added some text to the Commons licensing policy describing the current nebulous situation with the URAA, so you'll have something to link to in the future. See Commons:Licensing#Uruguay_Round_Agreements_Act. It hasn't yet been reviewed by others but I think it's about right. Dcoetzee 22:06, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl- no problems and thanks for letting me know. I do share your concerns and am probably "luke warm" to the unblock now per your arguments. Shame, but as I just said at ANI if the effort / reward balance is to low then that's the way it is :(. As an aside my sincerte thanks for your hard work on this and all the effort on the copyvios - I admire your patience and tenacity!! Pedro : Chat 13:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Integrity | ||
For outstanding diligence and fairness in addressing copyright violations. Durova 326 15:09, 15 October 2009 (UTC) |
Hi MRG,
I think this whole thing has slipped quite a lot, more so since Coren is pretty much hopelessly busy these days. I think that we need nonetheless need to re-launch this, in particular if / when CSB starts checking reviewed pages with the WP:FPPR trial. In order to save Coren the dev work, do you think we should take our "shopping list" and post them to WP:botreq? Also, in an ideal world, I'd separate the CSB reports from new articles and those from patrolled revisions into two subsections (considering suggesting Coren to run a separate instance for the second task). What do you think? MLauba ( talk) 13:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey there MRG. So it looks like we really are at the final curtain now, only 5 articles (all beginning with 'W') left in my list to be checked. I have done some recent work to all of them in the hope they will be passed first time. But as you can understand, I am keen to put this whole episode behind me now. and move on. I was just wondering if there was any chance of you checking the few remaining articles? :-) Bleaney ( talk) 16:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl,
I'm sorry to bother you again, but I have another question about the use of US government images. In this case, illustrations from the US Navy's flight manual, located here. I have a hard time following the legal "mumbo-jumbo" involved with copyright, so I wanted to double check with you to see if such an image qualifies as public domain. I think a few images from there would be a real help to the air combat maneuvering and basic fighter maneuvers articles, but not sure the proper way to upload them, or even if I can. Zaereth ( talk) 23:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Presumably the same holds for CC-By 1.0, by the same logic? -- Tagishsimon (talk) 11:21, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I was just wondering if this is now possible? It says here Wikipedia:Template_messages/Sister_projects#Wikinews that "Moving pages to Wikinews is not possible, for legal reasons. Copying material to Wikinews would put it under the CC-BY license, which violates the GFDL. However Wikinews articles can be moved to Wikipedia." And I recall it was said that the licence change would make this possible. Is that right? Are there any instructions? PS I'm creating Wikipedia:Wikinews as a page to collect Wikinews-related info. Rd232 talk 11:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Laptop thingy? Not a real computer? My laptop -- the only computer I've got -- has just thrown a fit. It's threatening suicide. I'm trying to coax it out from under my desk with promises of a new power pack. Thanks a lot, Troublemaker! — CactusWriter | needles 12:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I believe I have uncovered a small nest of single purpose copyright-violating sockpuppets relating to a film distribution company. My suspicion is that this is paid editing, but I have not tried to verify that suspicion. I've listed the main article and an article about one of the films at the copyright noticeboard, and I'm looking for further connections (and unfortunately finding a bunch of unrelated copyvios in the process).
Here's the delicate part: after I tagged a section of Wonderful World (film) as copyvio of the distributor's site, User:David Shankbone removed the template with the edit summary "revert - The text isn't on any official site, just blogs, so no evidence of copyvio - possible the blogs copied from Wikipedia". He then reworded the copyvio: [9] [10] [11] [12]. Note that this is an unreleased film, so it unlikely that he has seen it. I'm not sure what to do in this situation. And, since he believes that I am already harassing him, I probably should stay away from this one.
Is rewording copyvio in this manner ever ok? Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 17:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi again Moonriddengirl, I have a bad feeling about Peak Wilderness sanctuary. It exhibits the basic symptoms of a copy/paste. It was created big chunk of text without a single wikilink. Furthermore it was created by an IP not in Sri Lanka. However I search for original source but couldn't find. Towards end of the article it mentions about the trekking it might have copied from a commercial trekking web. There is a fair degree of chance that my doubts are to be wrong and I'm fully aware of it. I am willing to assume good faith. Could you please investigate the matter. Regards!-- Chanaka L ( talk) 02:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I noticed your recent removal of copyvio content on the page The Colony (TV series, as this edit also removed a lot of the summary information, as well as other, I was wondering if you could help me, or at least give me a clear idea of how to rewrite the material without it being copyvio, and if there are any specific points I should avoid. 125.238.162.226 ( talk) 10:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey Moonriddengirl. Do you know if there is a template that can be used to notify users who have moved pages incorrectly? The leftorium 12:21, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi!, I am a sysop from ml wiki, who recently joined OTRS. I learn that you are having trouble with a ticket from ml wiki. Would you want me to take over that and deal with it? Please let me know. Thanks, -- Jyothis ( talk) 16:18, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
No, there is not. yours is the last email I see in the chain. I would like to get that ticket moved to permissions-ml queue, but I dont see that on the drop down. If you dont mind, I will take it over and go thru the verification. Unless the author email (since he is net aware and active) from his official Id linked to the orginal source, we will not be able to approve it. I believe that we had communicated that before itself, as you did in the mail. Lets see.-- Jyothis ( talk) 16:33, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Okies, then. I have taken over the ticket. -- Jyothis ( talk) 17:04, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Would you please remind me how to attribute contributions that are split from one article to another? See Pittsburgh Air Reserve Station (newly created from Pittsburgh International Airport) and this. Thanks! Frank | talk 18:57, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Austinmayor ( talk · contribs) has uploaded a couple of images which he calls "artistic renderings" which are basically photoshop-filters applied to non-free images (see File:Artistic rendering of Wes Sims.jpg vs. this image for instance). Am I correct in that these are derivative works and thus can't be licenses under a free license as in this case? If so, how would one go about having them deleted; are they "blatant" enough for CSD F9 or should they be taken to WP:PUI? Thanks, -- aktsu ( t / c) 23:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you userfy Todd Friel to User:BilCat/Sandbox/Todd Friel? I saw his program on a new channel that my cable system just added, and I was interested in learning more about him. Unforutunatley, his article was AFDed in April. (I've not seen the article, but hte 2nd AFD seemed quite weak.) Since I'm going to have to do my own reaserch on him anyway, I'd like to put it to good use and potentially recreate the article. The Userifed text would give me a place to start. If I do get it ready, I will use Deletion Review/Appeal to restore it. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 03:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi again. :) Mahboubalishah was nominated for speedy deletion as a copyvio of [13], but User:Graeme Bartlett declined the speedy because the website says "Use of the form and content of this site is free, but subject to honesty." I'm just wondering if he did the right thing (and if that note on the website is enough to decline a speedy), or if we should restore the speedy deletion tag. Thanks, The leftorium 17:27, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Would you care to issue a ruling regarding File:Obesity Med2008.JPG, currently under discussion here? To me, this is about as obvious a non- transformative derivative work as can be, but IANAL and all that. – iride scent 20:39, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Simple. Really. Take you 120 seconds. Honestly. [14] Regards, Piano non troppo ( talk) 13:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
Thanks for keeping an eye out. I'm doing the research now to clean up the Stanley Kubrick biography. I'm really curious about how to improve the quality of articles in the Wikipedia. As it stands, the page has a ton of stuff about his films, but you don't a good enough sense of the person. He's amongst the most influential filmmakers in the history of the art, so I figure he deserves better from the Wikipedia. He gets more page views than George Lucas. I wrote in the discussion some hints about his influences, hoping someone would pick up on it, and perhaps would collaborate...no bites. I'm going to try a few more things in the coming weeks to see if I can get a collaborative effort going. If not, I'll just go at it myself. --crm411 17:08, 19 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crm411 ( talk • contribs)
I think, maybe, that they are fixed. I found a PD US gov't illustration of the hydrologic cycle in Florida and asked User:Kmusser to create a graphic that seems to work. As for the SJRWMD, they seem to be dinks. However, I am grateful for your assistance, though it essentially put me back where I was before (dammit). I have another article that I feel pretty strongly would be FA quality if I could find images, but that seems to be over the top. It's best to stick to obscure topics that were somewhat popular before 1923... -- Moni3 ( talk) 18:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Dear Moonriddengirl. I need help again, on getting the page of Santidev Ghose to show a picture of him. I uploaded the picture, taken by me in 1980, and it did upload, far as I can see. But it still would not show up. Perhaps it is waiting to be approved or something. Can you help please ? Tonymitra ( talk) 23:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I saw your discussion with Theleftorium concerning text copied from from the Illinois State Archives website on those mental hospital pages. That text is a description taken directly from the Illinois Secretary of State's website (which hosts the archival info). According to their disclaimer notice here, Information presented on the Secretary of State’s web site is considered public information and may be distributed or copied. The question is whether that simple of a notice conforms with WP release needs. — CactusWriter | needles 07:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
User:Moonriddengirl/CCI-notice -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Dear madame !
I have not added any Image and you are advising me it is violation of Copy rights .
furthermore the image there was present before my editing and I did not change or add any image .
furthermore it when you do delete or edit something the image was tempered by your side , I fixed the Html language bug only .
I am getting this in some mistake from your side .
From
KSY . —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
KSY3 (
talk •
contribs) 14:28, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
dear madame !
how can something whihc is History be copy right violation , as I just quoted the history from Certian Hitroy Books and from other Pages of Wikipedia .
I am not Copying and just pasting .
It is just Funny and tell me when you say that , it is violation of copy right can you explain
As the Most Important Topic of World is being denied space in Wiki that can be valuble to reaserchers
I am just quoting from your other Pages in Wiki pedia not some book .
Explain , how quoting can be a Copy right Violation when you demand references .
regards
KSY —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
KSY3 (
talk •
contribs) 14:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi MRG, could you take a look here and advise. Thank you. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker ( talk) 01:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I think I have fixed the sentence. Do you agree? Racepacket ( talk) 04:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you restore the history of Charlie Zelenoff or delete it as a G4? Thanks! :-) The leftorium 19:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi MRG,
Seeing as CW's going to be busy for a month, would you like me to try and work more in-depth on WP:CP? MLauba ( talk) 11:24, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
User:MLauba/CPC. Helpful? MLauba ( talk) 16:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
further info on devils diciples discussion page 24.217.66.219 ( talk) 19:46, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Zoinks, not only was the PROD'd article unrelated to the actual topic - it, well ... sucked. I at least made a more-than-reasonable stub out of it and moved it back to articlespace. Hope it's a little better now. Some of those Minnesota college article are in sad shape. Thanks for undeleting for me. ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
DBZROCKS submitted this AfD, but then went ahead before the AfD was closed and wiped the article out, leaving a redirect. I know that we're told to be bold, but given that he's the one who submitted it for deletion, isn't that a little sudden? Or is that normal? Thanks for any insight you can provide. - moritheil Talk 07:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to take the time to thank you for your help on this item on the Wendy Doniger article, to which I responded on my own talk page. I especially appreciate your having taken the time to post a note on my talk page with such a clear explanation. It was very helpful. Here are two notes I made on the same issue, one on my talk page thanking you there, and another I had posted on the Doniger discussion page a day earlier:
From my talk page to you: Thank you that was very instructive and I appreciate your help in making that edit. Only to keep the record clear it was one sentence that you quite correctly deleted from my longer contribution, which long contribution was repeatedly bulk deleted rather than incisively corrected as you have done. Thanks for getting involved and for helping me. Meetoohelp (talk) 15:53, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
From the Doniger discussion page to the other editors of that page: Thanks for the concern you show for the quality of this article. If there is a full sentence in the article that is found to be a copy of a full sentence from another page please delete it singly. On the other hand, to write an article about Doniger that contained none of the information on her cv would be difficult and of course unnecessary. This article is short not only on facts about Doniger, but also on Doniger's opinions, and conversely long on other peoples opinions. It should conform to what other bios of living person look like as to the relative space given to acts of the subjects, and then to criticism of that person. I think it would be helpful to look at articles about similar people, and I would suggest it should look something like Bart Ehrmans, whose work is similar and who attracts controversy for related reasons. In contrast to higher quality articles in Wikipedia, this Doniger page has the appearance of a blog spot. I suggest we editors should move to a bio with one pithy quote of criticism, and one pithy rebuttal quote, the remainder being a description of her work. There are plenty of internet forums for blogging and opinions and this article appears to have inappropriately achieved the character of those. Meetoohelp (talk) 15:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure if you intend just to make the technical contribution to the copyright issue, or to be more involved to increase the quality of the article, the later would certainly be welcomed, the article seems to need a referee of some sort.
Thanks again. Meetoohelp ( talk) 16:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
The two proposed guidelines will be eventually promoted with a sliver of voters, and two months later will be suddenly contested by a dozen people who didn't participate until then. ;) MLauba ( talk) 10:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
As you were involved in the case of blocked user Pr3st0n, I thought I should bring to your attention this message: User talk:93gregsonl2#New to Wikipedia from new user FriargateFairy. Reference is made to the death of Pr3st0n which makes me suspect sockpuppetry, in view of the previous hoax on this subject. To support my suspicion, I've just discovered Gareth Forrest's MySpace page has the URL http://www.myspace.com/friargate-fairy . The page User:Pr3st0n/MSN strongly suggests that Pr3st0n's real name is Gareth Forrest.
I've never been involved with a sockpuppetry case, so I'm not sure if that's sufficient evidence to file a formal investigation, or whether we should wait a bit longer to see what FriargateFairy does next. -- Dr Greg talk 19:56, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your rapid response, CactusWriter. -- Dr Greg talk 22:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I have one article watchlisted that I removed after 7 days on CP, was recreated and the source now states "Copyleft by soandso". Re-list pending clarification or leave it? MLauba ( talk) 08:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl (Deletion Administrator):
I've been made aware that my recently posted article on Victoria Riskin was removed/deleted from Wikipedia website and I am contacting you to "contest deletion" as stated in Wiki instructions, as I don't understand why the posting was deleted due to "blatant copyright infringement." Here is the thread below to explain action take on my article:
A page with this title has previously been deleted.
If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below.
17:46, 2 October 2009 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Victoria Riskin" (Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for over seven days)
Let me give you some background: I currently work in press/communications at the Writers Guild of America, West (WGAW) in Los Angeles. Former WGAW President/member/writer Victoria Riskin herself contacted me a few months ago asking, as a favor, if I could please post a profile page for her on Wikipedia, so I agreed to help her out. As I am new to Wiki and have never posted in article before, I tried my best to post an article on Vicki following Wiki's format/rules/guidelines, etc.
Please note that ALL content for the article was NOT borrowed from other sources/websites but rather article content was repurposed/pulled from from Vicki's own personal bio that she supplied to me for Wiki use.
Once the article was posted, I received notice/flaggings that this article may be removed if I did not include proper citations/references for content, so since all the content actually came from her own supplied bio, I thought the best thing to do was reference content from the WGAW's own website, since Vicki recently received an honorary award from the WGAW and much of the same content was used in our awards press release/program - I am not sure how this qualifies for copyright infringement? If I remove the references to WGAW website/release, will that solve this issue? Again, how can the content on Vicki's article be "copyright infringement" when 100% of content I used came from her own personal bio she supplied to me? Would it be better if you reposted article without external references, as I only included them later as I thought Wiki required me to or the article would be removed anyway?
I would appreciate if you could please advise on how best to resolve at your soonest. Much appreciated, as I'd like to respond back to Victoria Riskin herself.
If you'd like to talk more, I am can be reached at: 323-782-4651 (office).
Thanks Gregg Mitchell WGAW —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggmitch ( talk • contribs) 18:38, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Your service to Wikipedia has exceeded 2½ years, so you're entitled to display this badge. Mgreason ( talk) 19:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Howdy Moonriddengirl!
First, my apologies for coming to you directly on this issue. I am not completely sure how best to deal with this situation and you've been a help to me in the past on copyright violation issues; you have also dealt with the editor in question here. I just reverted edits to Matt Mitrione made by User:Justastud15 due to a large chunk of the edits being copy/pasted from [15]. I placed the standard warning on the user's talk page. I also reviewed the user's talk page as they have a habit of periodically blanking their talk page. This version of their talk page shows where you blocked the editor for 24 hours due to repeatedly violating the copyright policy and having been warned about it twice before that block. I do not know if you want to handle this, third, violation directly from my telling you here or if there is an admin board that would be more appropriate for me to make this mention on. WP:CP seems incorrect as the content is reverted, WP:AIV is wrong as it's not necessarily vandalism (it is but it isn't I guess), and I'm not sure how quickly reports to WP:AN are responded to (not that you may respond to this quickly). If there is someplace I should post a notice, let me know and I'll do it. Thanks for your help with this and for all you've done in the past. -- TreyGeek ( talk) 00:12, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I (largely) produced this page (either logged in or via an IP address) as the episodes came and went on BBC Iplayer. There is no complete list on the web, ergo it cannot therefore be referenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MGD11 ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Some (not all) were copied - after completing the episode list for series 1, I largely left Wikipedia alone. If the page could be re-instated, I would quite happily re-edit them to conform to Wikipedia standards. MGD11 ( talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 19:07, 27 October 2009 (UTC).
I could cope with that! Besides, the episodes on iplayer get rotated every week so a description of allthe episodes couldn't take more than a month... MGD11 ( talk • contribs) 11:33, 29th October 2009 (GMT)
I need to include a reference to Nadia Reisenberg in a wiki article on Josef Hofmann. If possible, please inform me why the previous wiki article on Reisenberg got deleted. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alextierno98 ( talk • contribs) 04:50, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Given this section and your edit, I'd invite you to chime in on the rationale of 1.0 text being compatible. Thanks in advance. Q T C 06:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
... and this is exactly the section that will cause the biggest brouhaha . Oddly enough, I predict it will be the pro-Hutchison users who will try to eliminate it. I know from experience -- I got tired of trying to fight off all the trivial infighting with both camps -- but it seems the biggest issue is that Hutchison supporters don't want the word "Republican" associated with her and her opponents do. A political section will need to mention it. Good luck. — CactusWriter | needles 12:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey there...in my brief return to editing, I bring you two interesting cases of copyright violations, 2009 Thekkady boat disaster and Lydia Foy. I've refrained from using the doomful copyvio template since the articles in question contain a mixture of blatant copyright violation, close paraphrase, and paraphrase that is most likely just fine. Is using the copyvio template the right procedure though, rather than bugging you? :) TwilligToves ( talk) 14:40, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
←Okay. I hope I have sufficiently addressed Lydia Foy. There is still close paraphrasing of the court judgment, but I am advised that such documents are not copyrightable. Off to look more closely at the other. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:09, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Thanks for your help with this - I really am extremely grateful. Yes, bad-timing indeed, but no matter. For now, a brief note - 2009 Thekkady boat disaster was put together far too quickly, and I'm grateful for your edits. Lydia Foy I believed was sufficiently paraphrased and cross-referenced; as you said, the court documents themselves should be available under appropriate licence, so hopefully that will address some/all of it. Re. Braille Institute of America, yes, it was indeed BasicallyGood ( talk · contribs), and it was 'way back' in April - OK, not so long, but 15000 edits for me. I've been on Wikipedia rather a lot since then, and would now make sure that I added the appropriate links on the talk-page etc. ( example). Gah, you probably don't need such 'proof', I think I'm getting too used to this RfA thing where I seem to have to keep explaining myself - sorry. Anyway - Braille - I was merely acting to try and help them split the article using summary-style. I hope we can contact them to sort that one out. Re. William Windsor (goat), I've had a quick look at your edits, but not had time to check it all out.
In all of the above, I'll need to spend time, checking the sources and looking at exactly which bits are considered a problem, and why; thus, I suggest that we continue these discussions on the respective article talk-pages. Again, thanks for the assistance. Chzz ► 09:11, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl. Here you removed one of the copyright-infringement tags but not the other. Was OTRS permission received for both sections of text, or just the one? Powers T 13:56, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Here's my lame attempt at a Halloween card (hopefully it will work in your browser). I hope you like it! :D The crematorium Happy Halloween! 14:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I'm not really sure I fully understand what that post on my talk page was all about, but thank you for your concern and efforts. To be honest, I thought he and I were friends of a sort, and it really shocked me to see such a post. I regret that such a think would take place on my talk page, and I really appreciate your help. Thank you, and all my best. — Ched : ? 17:47, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the Halloween wishes, o fairy godmother of all copyright investigations. You're an inspiration to us all. MLauba ( talk) 22:21, 31 October 2009 (UTC) |
Hello, there are some issues being raised here in which we are not sure whether a book has copied some Wikipedia articles or if we have copied the book. Could you take a look please? nableezy - 22:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey there Moonriddengirl. I don't have much experience dealing with serial copyright violators, so I thought I would ask you for help. Ironholds relayed to me that Arthur Clavell Salter was almost a direct copy of the Oxford DNB's version of the article. Apparently, this is also the case for several of the other articles that Flaming Ferrari has created. I I was wondering what the general course of action is for cases like these. Thanks, NW ( Talk) 20:59, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
←Home, exhausted, running the program now. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:01, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
←Okay, I have populated Wikipedia:WikiProject Copyright Cleanup/Flaming Ferrari and have found copyright infringement from one non-ODNB (I hate those initials; I can never remember their order!) source so far. The article has been blanked for listing at CP. Since I don't have ODNB, I am going to need some assistance in review. (I always need assistance in review, as we have literally thousands of articles listed at the main investigation page, but in this case it's particularly a problem, since I don't have access to the source.) Once I've verified a few more issues, it may be a good idea to ask the biography Wiki project to help out. (Maybe they will; the opera and gastropod wikiprojects were stellar with much larger investigations.) But as a start, Ironholds, I need your discretion in handling Sir Robert Perks, 1st Baronet. How "slightly problematic" do you mean? Does it need {{ subst:copyvio}} or does it need {{ close paraphrase}}? Can you provide a few examples?
The lack of communication is never a good sign. I've dealt with a whole lot of copyright problems in the year (and nearly a half) that they've been my main focus on Wikipedia, and I've seen a lot of people respond to questions about copyright problems. There are some red flags, and silence is among them.
He received a clear block warning in August, here. What I've found so far predates that. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
An editor has nominated Dragonfly Forest, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragonfly Forest and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. -- Eastmain ( talk) 17:21, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
I am sorry to see that my contributions have caused so many problems. I thought I was contributing positively to wikipedia, but now it seems the majority of my work will be deleted. As a result of this I have decided to retire from wikipedia. I wasn't aware that my contributions breached copyright, so it's kinda sad to now see all my work so brutally undone. However I realise you are just doing your job. Once again apologies for the mess I have caused. Flaming Ferrari ( talk) 22:46, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, can you advise me on the copyright status of scans from The National Archives (UK)? Or do you know someone who can? I obtained a few scans a while ago (I had to pay for them, although I believe if you go to the National Archives in London, you can view them for free). The scans are of Foreign Office documents (correspondence etc.) from 1947. Can I upload these to Commons, or are they non-free? Would be grateful for any pointers. Best, -- JN 466 14:29, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Got mail. Skäpperöd ( talk) 21:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
In fact, I had sent you an email from wp-fr. Did you get it ?
Best regards, -- Moumine70 ( talk) 14:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the halloween card. I love it! I've finished with the rewrite of Betty Skelton Erde. It turned out to be a bigger job than I initially thought. She is really a remarkable woman. Please use your tool to see if I missed any "borrowed" phrases. Thanks for all you do. Mgreason ( talk) 15:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl! Had a quick question regarding copyright issues on a file a new editor has uploaded (I'm actually having some other semi-related issues with the editor in question, but that's for another time and another place :) ), and thought you might be a person to turn to. The other editor uploaded a movie poster at File:Papadom019.jpg, and under "Licensing" claimed they are the copyright holder of the picture. That seems... well, probably not true. The file can probably stay up under a fair-use rationale, but I'm not sure how to go about changing the licensing permissions/fair-use rationales for a file uploaded by a different editor. Thanks! Singularity42 ( talk) 16:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to revert you but the version you restored was still in infringement of the MSC source. I was rewriting a clean stub while you restored :) MLauba ( talk) 13:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I'd like your opinion on the copyright status of the (deleted) article Grigory Kheifets. It was originally uploaded to Conservapedia and then uploaded here by the original author (with no intervening edits by others). Harej ( talk · contribs) deleted the article a few days ago citing concerns over whether users surrender their copyright to Conservapedia when they upload their own work there (see the talk page). If you aren't familiar with the site, RationalWiki's raison d'etre is criticism Conservapedia - not that I have a problem with that, but the arguments put forth on the linked page are, IMO, completely speculative. As I understand it, Conservapedia would need to explicitly state that contributors surrender their rights to the site - which it doesn't (nor does it imply it). Could you take a look at the relevant license page and let me know what you think? Oh yes, you might want to be warned of pointed anti-WP and particularly anti-WP-copyright policy sentiment on the page. The article itself looks well sourced, so it'd be a shame to lose it. Regards, – Toon 17:58, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
It wasn't obvious that there was a copyright problem with 12th Pioneers (The Kelat-i-Ghilzie Regiment) until it disappeared and its links turned red. Can you please restore it to Wikipedia:Copyright problems so that infringing text can be edited and sourced from material in the public domain.-- FwdObserver ( talk) 19:28, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
The 12th Pioneers or the Kelat-i-Ghilzie Regiment were a pioneer regiment of the British Indian Army. They could trace their origins to 1838, when they were known as the 3rd Regiment of Infantry, Shah Shujah's Force.
... As a reward for its bravery, the name "Khelat-i-Ghilzie" was given to the Regiment and it was made an extra regiment of the Bengal Presidency Army. This honour title was inscribed on its name, colours and cap badges for most of its existence.
The 12th Pioneers fought in the Second Afghan War, at Maharajpore, at Burma in the Third Anglo-Burmese War and it also saw service on the Punjab Frontier. During World War I it served in India and Mesopotamia. Transferred to the Bombay Pioneers after the reorganisation of 1922, it was disbanded shortly thereafter, sharing the fate of all pioneer battalions after the Great War.
Hello Moonriddengirl, website of this New York state government department is not public domain? Talk:New York State Department of Environmental Conservation#Website not public domain?. (Anonymous used the text from website at Chittenango ovate amber snail, so I have removed it rather. I can restore it easily then.) Thank you for your valuable work. -- Snek01 ( talk) 21:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Could you also protect the template {{ Anna Vissi}} as well? Thanks. Grk1011/Stephen ( talk) 00:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, have just noticed that you've taken exception to a quotation in Jamaica National Heritage Trust. Being aware of WP:NFC I would not have considered it "extensive". Bit of a subjective one though. Is there a definition anywhere of what Wikipedia considers "Extensive quotation"? Failing that, what's your personal working definition? -Arb. ( talk) 18:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I do understand you are away from your desk today, but here's a question. I noticed a new snail article yesterday, and I welcomed the editor, today however I checked the ref and saw that the text had been copied. One part is not quite verbatim, as I changed that before I wrote to the editor. Do you think what I said was OK? " "Please do be careful of one thing. Today I checked the reference you gave for the snail article, and I see that I need to explain that you must not create an article on Wikipedia by cutting and pasting chunks of text from another source, in this case a website (specifically the IUCN Red List website.) In almost every case you have to read the information, make sure you understand it OK, and then write a new account of it from scratch yourself. When you don't do that, and instead copy something directly, what you are doing is quite likely to be an illegal copyright infringement, not to mention plagiarism. Sorry about that, but this is something we have to make clear up front. It is in fact mentioned at the bottom of the edit page under "Please note:" but I guess a lot of people don't notice that. All best wishes to you, signature." Is that suitable? Best to you, Invertzoo ( talk) 22:16, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
OK, good, thanks to you too. I am glad that I mentioned it to you since you discovered that there are more articles that have the same problem. I wish you all the best with your very valuable work on here! Invertzoo ( talk) 21:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
I have read the SCMP article on Sir Run Run that we were wondering about. See WT:CHINA.-- Danaman5 ( talk) 02:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Please review temp sub page on the above that I have started today as Malone should have a page and the copy vio issue has been there for a while. Thanks. Paste Let’s have a chat. 14:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
We'll be baptizing our youngest so I'm not going to be around for the week-end. Could you run the contrib tool on User:Acntx? CSB found two recent instances of copying from the Handbook of Texas online, most recently on Willow City, Texas, and going to the AfDs linked on his talk page, it appears this happened before.
Note that I screwed up last time this happened because I meant to twinkle a copyvio warning but ended up with 3RR warning instead (idiotic I know). There's been a follow-up discussion on my talk page and a statement following the cclean message on Talk:Panola, Texas already. And I just added to the user's talk page after the last CSB notice. Thanks, MLauba ( talk) 17:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
This page is awaiting permission to use the copyrighted content. The request has been put out and permission has been granted by content and image owners. I am just waiting on Wikipedia to give the okay to use it. It is in the works though. After permission is granted, how do I go about re-posting the content? LizGere ( talk) 21:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)LizGere
Thank you for responding! I completely understand why you needed to do what is done for the time being. I have an email back from Wikipedia saying that the permission from IHA needed to be more specific and I suspect they will fill out the template I gave them and send it back soon. Then it will be off to Wikipedia so I can post the content. LizGere ( talk) 22:04, 6 November 2009 (UTC)LizGere
With regard to your recent deletion and restoration of National Museum of Arms and Armour, I'd like to ask a question. As the person who tagged the article at that title as a copyvio and posted it at WP:CP, I was surprised when the article was simply redirected (instead of being deleted and then replaced with a redirect, as you have just done—and as I could have done instead of bringing it to CP). Are there any guidelines that deal with when a copyvio should be removed from an article's history, as opposed to just being excised from the article or overwritten? The information would help me know how to deal with the copyvios I run across fairly frequently in the course of my editing. Deor ( talk) 14:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
The problem I had with the IP editor is that they used the most restrictive default setting on the copyright warning and in essence blanked the entire page. You are saying that I have no recourse for people using that template to blank pages and refuse to discuss the issue in the talk page as stated in the template. It was only after he altered the template settings to stop blanking the page that I stopped reverting him (that and I noticed the big honking "don't remove" warning about the same time). Alyeska ( talk) 00:54, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I'd just like to check if you know that WikiPilipinas has forked some 10,000+ articles from the English Wikipedia. So it's possible that some of the text you've deleted or tagged here in WP.en as being copyvios from WikiPilipinas are actually the other way around. Thanks. -- seav ( talk) 01:36, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi M. Could you drop by Wikipedia talk:Suspected copyright violations#Comments on the new system when you have a spare moment, si vous plait? I'm keen on getting Coren to add section headers to empty SCV subpages, but I want to make sure that I don't mess up CP's formatting. Cheers, – Toon 12:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
A while ago you helped me out with an Arnhem VC recipient that I noticed had a lot of text copied from another website. While I've been expanding another Arnhem VC, I've noticed that this text would seem to be pretty much a copy and paste from this website. My initial reaction would be to just revert this edit, rather than nominate the page for deletion, but thought I'd better check with someone who understands all of this stuff.
Cheers for your time, Ranger Steve ( talk) 13:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, true genius is never appreciated! :) Giant Snowman 17:38, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I think you missed The Honors College at West Virginia University at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 October 31. :) The leftorium 18:03, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The Dying Center was the first of its kind and really only those involved with it have recorded this information. So how does one reference something if the founders are the only ones who have written about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devi 8 ( talk • contribs) 00:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonwiddengirl ! I've been busy trying to make head or tail of various help pages, in the process I've seen your name crop up a number of times making edits to various help pages, just thought in case you missed it, to point you in the direction of the Wikipedia:Help Project, where we have a few things going on concurrently, but if you're ever stuck in the maze, come visit us other editors who are wandering around there too, it even seems like some sense might come out of it all :) p.s. one of our current requests/tasks is cleaning up Help:Files ... Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 02:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, just to inform you that I have decided against retiring from wikipedia, and have begun to rewrite some of the articles which were cause for concern. If I can be of any help with your investigation please do let me know. Just for the record I have never had access to any of dod's resources in full, the only copyvios from dod's which you may find will have come from searching online, rather than subscriber content or the like. Best wishes Flaming Ferrari ( talk) 03:07, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Certainement; will review this evening when I get back from uni/my political party's exec meeting (9:00 GMT or so). For future use, if you want me to email you my ODNB ID, give me a poke. Ironholds ( talk) 14:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Can you protect? Thanks, The leftorium 18:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
What should i do to show you that i got the right to submit thread article on behalf of UCB and so you guys dont bother us any more?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucb authority ( talk • contribs) 21:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Alright, I believe you guys are helpful in sharing info! Can you let me edit my page so that i can re-write?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucb authority ( talk • contribs) 21:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Alright Dear , thanks for your support btw can i reach you through any messenger if possible?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucb authority ( talk • contribs) 21:47, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Well i need to know how can i make it more unbias ..I am new to wikipedia so just wanted some help from you also i own some forums would you like join it there also?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucb authority ( talk • contribs) 21:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks dear , I will try to be as what you said but please dont take out the image. I would add reference with the paragraph.
to whom this may concern, there was a terrible misconception on my page in which resulted in a deletion, now i took proper steps to resolve this matter, i was given options and i chose to email wiki the links to my original site bearing my creative commons licenses for my biography and nothing resulted,no user talk, no permissions,anything confirming resolve....please reply with clear info regarding this matter, and why havent i recieved any replies to my emails....thanks in advance. FORCEONE2000 ( talk) 19:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for cleaning Federal Investigation Agency. I assume the job is done so I have marked it accordingly on Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 October 31. If you are not finished with your work then please revert me. Thank you. Bwrs ( talk) 05:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I will be sure not to continue to post homosexual content within the sandbox. thank you so much for contacting me nicely, rather than yelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neo The User ( talk • contribs) 20:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Hiya Moonriddengirl! As always, long time no see. Just a small question for you: is it okay that Cover Album is an article on an actual cover album, while Cover album redirects to Cover version (an article about cover albums themselves)? Is it necessary to move Cover Album to Cover Album (album) or Cover Album (Misono album)? Either way, it's quite confusing ;D I hope this doesn't hurt your head like it does mine. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 21:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
i have recently sent another email to permissions and am informing you of this also, the headline is: THE OFFICIAL PAGE OF "GEE ROCK & THA CND COALITION", so it can be located, please let me know if everything is good with it, and that it was recieved by the permissions successfully....thanks in advance FORCEONE2000 ( talk) 21:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Article seems nice and clean :). Ironholds ( talk) 02:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Article has now been rewritten. Regards Flaming Ferrari ( talk) 16:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I have come to see (on receiving an enquiring e-mail) that it appears all and sundry perusers of Wikipedia are able to freely access and read personal notes between me and 'an editor'. MasterVerbosity ( talk) 00:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
a woman has no right to delete any male subject, you should stick to deleting flowers and topics like pink dresses. YOU DELETED A SUBJECT ON BOXINGS BEST 100 MATCHES OF , HOW COULD YOU WHEN WE ONLY RECENTLY EVEN HAD FEMALE BOXERS, IF I SEE A FILE ON LAILA ALI NOW AND IT HASNT BEEN DELETED BY YOU...THEN YOUR A HYPOCRITE.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.106.89.136 ( talk) 00:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Hey, when did Wikipedia move to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan? :-) -- NeilN talk ♦ contribs 00:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
FYI, I have started a discussion at the ANI board in regards to User:Justastud15's habits of uploading copyrighted images and copy/pasting material from other websites. And as a second FYI, I invoked your name, specifically when I brought issues with this user to you recently ( [23]) and you suggested ANI as a possible avenue for me to raise my concerns. -- TreyGeek ( talk) 03:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
MLauba ( talk) 13:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl - Sorry to bother you, but I was wondering if I could trouble you with a copyright query? I've been discussing the article Flyfishers' Club with a user Morganix79. I speedied the original version, and the editor produced a new version in his/her sandbox at User:Morganix79/Flyfishers' Club. Morganix79 also contacted another editor who is involved in articles about London clubs, Debonairchap, who created an article in main space which looks like it's based on Morganix79's draft here. Cleverly, I edited the article, and only later realised that Morganix79's work needs attributed somewhere :-/ I'm not sure whether a note in a dummy edit summary/talk page is sufficient here or whether something more complicated is required? -- Kateshortforbob talk 14:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, This is my first experience with copyright issues, so I thought I’d write to you to make sure I’m doing this correctly. I see the instructions at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems, but it looks like most reports are quite cryptic, with an article and a possible source, and not much more. I don’t know whether the intended process is simply to identify the problem and let the admin sort it out, but I wanted to provide a little more background. Please let me know if I should be including all this in a report.
Long discussion of issues
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
I will go ahead and place the template on the article, send a note to the editor, and file it here. The article is Competency-based education. The editor is User:Rgannonc Editor MuffledThud noted issues including a copypaste concern on 14 Nov here. It is not clear to me whether MuffledThud knew there were problems, or merely suspected. Article editor posted at the Feedback forum Wikipedia:Feedback#What_is_Competency-Based_Education.3F, which is how I became involved. The query at Feedback asserted that there were no copyright issues, and asked how to remove the warning. Article editor removed the warnings. MuffledThud reinstated some of the warnings, but did not reinstate the copypaste warning. I do not know whether MuffledThud is convinced there are no copyright violations, simply accepted the word of the editor, or simply chose to focus on unambiguous issues. MuffledThud also welcomed the editor, but noted COI issues. I looked to see if I could find evidence supporting or refuting the copyright concerns and found this online It is not a straight copy-paste, but the WP article is clearly derived from the paper. I copied a paragraph from each, and posted to the WP:Feed forum to see what the editor had to say. (I’m aware that some potential violations go the other direction; that didn’t seem likely in this case, but I wanted to AGF and see what the editor had to say. While it has only been a couple days, there has been no response. I also posted my response to MuffledThud. While I did not post to the editor’s talk page, if she asked a question at the Feedback desk, it seems reasonable she should expect an answer there. I will post the Copyright problem notice to her talk page. Reasons why this isn’t a straight-forward, and I didn’t nominate for Speedy Delete:
seems like a clear problem, I haven’t checked all paragraphs, and I think the author used the opening almost unchanged, then moved on to more original prose. Is it the responsbility of the person looking into this to check each and every paragraph, and blank out only those with unambiguous problems? I’ve taken the route of blanking the whole article, assuming we can sort it out if the editor is interested.
|
SPhilbrick T 15:54, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Just to let you know I've created the subpae as noted on the copyright violations. It should be free of issues, as I've just put in the basic data when he was bishop, with the standard infobox and succession boxes. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
These are the ones that would touch on my project:
I checked them superficially, and only declared the ones clean where information was clearly not a copyright violation (such as basic dates or succession box addtions). Others are likely clean, due to rewriting. The ones without notations will be harder to figure out. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
I get it now. I was looking for an (a) and (c) in the guideline itself, rather than in the Terms of Use statement. I did read back, honest, but I was looking in the wrong place (obviously). :) Franamax ( talk) 16:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Skimming through the "what links here" for {{ OTRS pending}}, I found American Medical Group Association, which has had the tag affixed to the article itself since creation on 5 May. Since it duplicates large portions of the AMGA website, it might be useful if we actually had permission to use the text. I'm not sure if it'll be accessible in the OTRS system, but could you have a rummage for a relevant document? Cheers, – Toon 20:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
On its little electronic way to you :) MLauba ( talk) 23:17, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
The discussion is at WT:POLICY#list of pages. I'd love to get your input before we make at post at VPP suggesting that we add policy subcats to some pages, including WP:Copyrights and WP:Copyright violations. (Watching) - Dank ( push to talk) 14:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Curious how copyright applies to quoting the conclusions of a report. Its isn't an extensive quote, its a huge report. How is it a problem? I believe the person who used the template was doing so to make a point. Would you please reconsider. Justin talk 17:20, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
An editor is removing text from the King levitation article citing copyright concerns [26]. As far as I know, descriptions of magic trick methods cannot be copyrighted but I'd like an informed second opinion. I checked other magic trick articles and about half of them have descriptions of the method used to do the trick. -- NeilN talk ♦ contribs 22:39, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, we've talked briefly before about copyvio things - finally seem to have some spare time to make a return. Been away for a long time so just wanted to check on the current process for the listings page when things are resolved. When I was previously editing (a few years back), we just deleted resolved cases, but it looks like there may be a cleverer system now, could you let me know what I should do with the listings once I've resolved something? Ta Kcordina Talk 09:28, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Can you, if appropriate, nominate and delete this image? It was used in an article that has the company logo as a fair-use image. This image of the bottles of the company's product add no distinctive value to the article and probably should not be used. I removed the image from the article. It is impossible for anyone not a routine deletionist to make their way through MFD, speedy, and all to find the correct tags. You will know if the image can be used (very unlikely), and how to handle it. Thanks. -- IP69.226.103.13 ( talk) 05:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I agree to publish that work under the free license *copyright license*.
I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content
may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
Valid? Seek clarification that he explicitly meant CC-BY-SA? MLauba ( talk) 09:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Potsdam University Library, translation of [27]. But...
Thoughts? MLauba ( talk) 10:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. I came across your name on the Copyrights Problem page and hope you don't mind me asking you informally for your opinion. I'm not particularly versed in copyright issues and don't want to jump in just yet and flag an issue on the Problems page. I've just come across a series of pages which start under the main article Next Generation Air Transportation System. This article is based on a FAA fact sheet and is in parts almost a word-for-word reproduction of the fact sheet. Would you know whether the FAA sheet is PD, and if so, whether it is appropriate to largely reproduce it on Wikipedia passing it off as our own work? I'm happy to raise the issue with the primary editor but just want to be sure I'm following policy when I do so. Thanks for your time. Nick Ottery ( talk) 11:43, 20 November 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 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 |
Hi Moonriddengirl!
I have a question about a copyright concern in the dogfight article. If a single sentence has been copied word for word from the source, would that be grounds for removal? Zaereth ( talk) 18:54, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
You're correct, that was an unfortunate oversight. I was kind of nudged to create the new page by comments on my FA nomination and forgot attribution, because I haven't copied Wiki material to create a new article before. I took notice for the future.
Hey, you're big on copyright, could you perhaps take a look at an issue in the nomination, there was a question about files used, which I answered but despite me asking for feedback the user raising the issue hasn't responded and nothing gets moving until this is answered in some way. Thank you. Hekerui ( talk) 21:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
I put a notice on ANI regarding the legal threat on Talk:Devils Diciples. -- Dbratland ( talk) 02:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Ahh... I never thought of that! I'll definitely keep it in mind in the future. (this is why I need the admin tools!) :-) Thanks! The leftorium 14:33, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I have another question. What should be done with Jhala and Jhala (clan)? Part of the Jhala article was copied to the Jhala (clan) article without attribution. Thanks, The leftorium 20:34, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey again Moonriddengirl. Could you take a look at John Todd (occultist) for me? It was deleted from Wikipedia a year ago and User:Ian.thomson restored it a few days ago, but I'm not sure if he was the original creator of that text. Thank you, The leftorium 17:42, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I feel really bad for bothering you again (I won't do it as often from now on!), but I was just wondering if you could confirm this (see User talk:Ser Amantio di Nicolao). I don't know much about public domain, and a whole bunch of articles by that user has been listed at WP:SCV. Many thanks! :) The leftorium 21:39, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi MRG, thanks so far. I have been urged by Franamax to first identify possible copyvios, and made a first plan, see User:Mdd#First identify possible copyvios. In short I propose to tag all my suspicious articles with a copypaste-template on top or in a section. I would appreciate your feed back on this (first) idea. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker ( talk) 12:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, could you take a look at this? I don't doubt he was given permission to upload the images, but is it fine without an explicit statement of being freely licensed (not just uploaded here) and without evidence of it? Thanks, -- aktsu ( t / c) 02:19, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey MRG, just responding to your question about the Ram Narayan images. Hekerui had the right idea but their explanations were a bit off.
Hope this helps. :-) Dcoetzee 06:29, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, just noticed you removed some copyright material from Asia-Pacific Song Contest 2010. For once, I am proud to also notice it wasn't me that added the material in the first place (phew!). This link shows it was someone called Senseimatthew who did it back in April 2009. And by the looks of it, this editor inserted several pieces of copyrighted material into the article for months following. I'll take a look at what was removed, and re-work on it, if that's ok?! P.S. did you get chance to see that Lostock Hall one in the end? I think I'm starting to get the hang of this, and the article looks better than ever before lol. Anyways, take care, and I'll catch you around wiki-world soon. Pr3st0n ( talk) 21:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
I came upon this edit to the subject article while watching recent changes. I Googled the text and got several hits. However, I don't know where the text originated and so am not sure if there exists a copyvio. I know it's a huge gray area and I'm not asking for miracles. I'm just hoping that your experienced eye will pick up something definitive that will tip the scales one way or the other. Apologies if I'm ringing the alarm bell over nothing. Thanks for your time. Tide rolls 05:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
may be asserted in error by the publisher, and that's concerning. The thought of that makes my head ache, though...I'll have enough challenges without seeing ghosts behind every door. Regards Tide rolls 15:22, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Can information released under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 1.0 license be used on Wikipedia (see Haga Haga)? If not, could we add that to the table in Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright? The leftorium 15:37, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you take a look at the history of Tina Knowles? I'm not sure if User:Brenntagee was the original creator of that text. Thanks, The leftorium 22:56, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | ||
I give you the Special Barnstar for being extremely helpful and kind to other edtiors, and for your work with copyright violations. It's very appreciated! :) The leftorium 13:01, 11 October 2009 (UTC) |
I hope you are doing well. Thanks so much for the note about the email, I did not know that. I wanted to point out that I think you forgot to actually physically delete it, because it is still there. So I wanted to let you know, so that you could delete it yourself, so that the edit history would sort of make sense. Good luck and bless you for all the hard work you do to keep Wikipedia free from copyvio. As you know, I still am very grateful indeed that you and your team enabled us to keep those 1,000 gastropod articles this spring instead of having to delete them. Best wishes, Invertzoo ( talk) 17:37, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi again, Thanks MRG! Best, Invertzoo ( talk) 16:38, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
User talk:IWazEre1 creating self promotion articles. Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 12:05, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Got another one.... Switchflicker Hell In A Bucket ( talk) 12:26, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
CatWizard777 ( talk) 12:17, 11 October 2009 (UTC) Dear Moonriddengirl Donators I know are trying to put up a page on me, I should like to ask your help in this matter, as you have deleted my biographical information without (in my opinion) checking all original sources. We should like to work on this page under your guidelines, and get a hold on thsi page until such time as this is laid out in a satisfactory manner that suits you. Please advise
The donators are: atomaticshoes & Julie Rex
Sincerely Darryl Read www.darrylread.com
sorry that i wrongly thought you were in conflict with the blocked user, thought user was disrupted you. apologies. entry since corrected. Ecoman24 (talk page) 13:15, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I thought you may want to see this, VRTS ticket # 2009082510043322. It relates to that case that you ended up reviewing and closing out yourself. I believe it simply re-iterates the necessity of either using our provided copyright request forms, or clearly explaining the ramifications of free licensing, coupled with the necessity to have the copyright owner choose a license themselves, and fill out the consent form themselves. Not sure if there is anything that can/should be done here, but wanted to bring it to your attention. Thanks. - Andrew c [talk] 14:32, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi there MRG, feels like were nearly at the summit of the alphabet mountain! I have done re-editied versions of the blanked St. Paul's Church, Bedford, St. Peter's Church, Bedford and Stamford American International School articles. I have also re-worded the wobbly content in Society of Headmasters & Headmistresses of Independent Schools and Sudbury (HM Prison), and was wondering if the close paraphrasing tags on these 2 articles could now be removed? I have also added reworded versions of the paragraphs you removed in the Standford Hill (HM Prison) and Times & Citizen articles. As were nearly at the end please tell me if im getting the hang of this? :-) Bleaney ( talk) 23:14, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I did wonder whether this would be PD because of it's source but thought that I didn't know the ins and outs of the copyright of US government sources well enough to decide either way. If it wasn't PD for that reason I did wonder whether it would be PD because of age, but again I wasn't sure as US sources of that age seem to be in a weird situation, and that's why I mentioned it's age on the copyright page. Dpmuk ( talk) 12:48, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Just so you know, the article you locked was constantly vandalized by user User:LAz17. He claims to have consensus - more specific explanation of this "consensus" was given by him in the talk page "We by 80% overwhelmingly reject the gay parades, and along with that we reject this in the wikipedia article. Simple analogy, no?" That is not a valid way to create the consensus, in a case you don't know you can't make an analogy between personal rejection of gay parade and article on Wikipedia. The information that was removed was 100% unrelated to gay parades, it was about Vladimir Putin endorsement. While I tried to achieve compromise by arguments he kept on posting conspiracy theories - how this information was put into this article with intention to alter election results (?!). He also claimed that the content is irrelevant trying to make it look like a content dispute but another user posted several independent sources that covered the issue and I had intention to expand that to include the background and aftermath of that letter which caused stir in the political scene of Serbia. Finally he posted in Serbian "Samo da znas, dok srbi dobijaju otkaze, tadic daje stotine hiljade dinara pederima - sto to nestavis u clanak?" which translates as "Just so you know, while serbs are getting fired, tadic is giving hundreds of thousands of dinars to fags - why don't you put that into the article?" and though he claimed he used the word homosexual not fag it's not true. This kind of writing is not only irrelevant and made up it is also libelous to Tadic and insulting to homosexuals. Finally in the last ANI against this user admins said that if he continues his irrational behavior there will be a reaction however your reaction was to lock the article instead of blocking him for good (he has a history of of template warnings on his talk page, ANIs on him and even a temporary block for his behavior). Now I don't know if this is the way we want Wikipedia to go, that anyone can abuse it and to slander left and right and make us all look like idiots for giving him the right to vandalize the article while claiming that his consensus is actually the consensus against homosexuals and that his reasons are basically conspiracy theories?! One more thing - this is an ongoing issue with a user that has a history of such behavior so please don't try to downplay it and direct me to talk with him as we've been through all that, meaning all red lines, all fine attempts to solve issues with him by other users have failed, there is no more time for that, that has all been tried and didn't work.-- Avala ( talk) 15:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Not to mention that no one would respond to request to discuss conspiracy theories and other things that LAz17 insists on in every discussion.-- Avala ( talk) 18:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
←There is an "initialism" in English: TLDR. It seems to me to be a real concern. Some Wikipedians seem to agree. A 716-word note may not be your best bet at keeping the discussion active. Cutting to the core is likely to get you more responses. Contributors encountering a long chunk of text may well choose to move on to something less time consuming. This is undoubtedly one of the reasons why the page instructions call for us to be concise. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:57, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Latest quotes from LAz17 directed at me [6], "you are full of POV stuff.", "What the hell are you smoking? Get off of your cocain or whatever you are on.", "Your last sentence there is really appalling, reaking with extreme POV.", "Truely disgusting, what you are trying to do here.", "Look, we know you are a Tadic supporter. At least take your sick POV out.". Now even No such user is talking about blocking LAz17. Which editor will join from the NPOVN now? Tell me which one? Who wants to get involved only to be insulted left and right by some LAz17? I don't think that anyone will. Btw maybe you didn't read what I wrote before but LAz17 has a history of many warnings, many ANIs and even a temporary block, and your optimistic approach that we are all capable to sit down and talk has only brought that he is testing boundaries further and further. As an admin you now have to step in and protect me from such grave personal insults and respond for that if not for his previous writings.-- Avala ( talk) 09:30, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl! :) Could you take a look at the Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya article (and the recently created Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Churu article)? They appear to be copyvios of this source, but I don't know how to find out if the Wikipedia version was published first. The leftorium 18:18, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Mrg. At User talk:Globe.explorer and Talk:Franca Batich, the editor says that they have sent two e-mails to Wikimedia. Could you check the OTRS office please? In the meantime, I've replaced the article with a stubbed version from the temp page and dropped the editor a note. Thanks :) — CactusWriter | needles 09:56, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, just want to check I'm not being stupid. My understanding is that copying an entire section, such as the lead, from one article into another, such they both have the text but only one the history, is against the (GFDL?) licence. Is that correct? Can anything be done to allow this, such as an edit summary that contains a link to the revision of the article being copied? I've found this happening at a lot of articles. Cheers, Verbal chat 10:12, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl - A quick question about the above: I've started working through the list and come across Carmencita (film). It looks from that page's history like you have already dealt with the copyright issue; is it safe to remove it from the list, or are there other steps to take? (Apologies if this is in the how-to!) --☇ Kateshortforbob talk☄ 14:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Can you take a peek at this picture and either comment or forward the request accordingly? Thanks! Frank | talk 14:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Tom McGehee is a new article at
User:Mgreason/Sandbox.
Mgreason (
talk) 15:29, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Dreams Come True is a new article at
User:Mgreason/Sandbox 3.
Mgreason (
talk) 15:50, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Mac Papers is a new article at User:Mgreason/Sandbox 5. Mgreason ( talk) 15:42, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I saw your notice on LAz17 page. Please see this. He call me a "vandalizer" on article that i created, and also he accused me for a sockpuppetry, beacuse he disagree with argument given on Template talk:Urban Rail transportation in the former Yugoslavia. Can you please tell this guy to talk with me with normal. I'm not the vandalizer neither sockpuppet (i can prove with CU if neccesery). I just want to work on articles that interest me, without any accusations. Thnx in advance-- Ex13 ( talk) 20:15, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I have reponded to your message at Talk: Artinc. Thank You. Artinc ( talk) 21:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC).
Hey, just letting you know I've added some text to the Commons licensing policy describing the current nebulous situation with the URAA, so you'll have something to link to in the future. See Commons:Licensing#Uruguay_Round_Agreements_Act. It hasn't yet been reviewed by others but I think it's about right. Dcoetzee 22:06, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl- no problems and thanks for letting me know. I do share your concerns and am probably "luke warm" to the unblock now per your arguments. Shame, but as I just said at ANI if the effort / reward balance is to low then that's the way it is :(. As an aside my sincerte thanks for your hard work on this and all the effort on the copyvios - I admire your patience and tenacity!! Pedro : Chat 13:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Integrity | ||
For outstanding diligence and fairness in addressing copyright violations. Durova 326 15:09, 15 October 2009 (UTC) |
Hi MRG,
I think this whole thing has slipped quite a lot, more so since Coren is pretty much hopelessly busy these days. I think that we need nonetheless need to re-launch this, in particular if / when CSB starts checking reviewed pages with the WP:FPPR trial. In order to save Coren the dev work, do you think we should take our "shopping list" and post them to WP:botreq? Also, in an ideal world, I'd separate the CSB reports from new articles and those from patrolled revisions into two subsections (considering suggesting Coren to run a separate instance for the second task). What do you think? MLauba ( talk) 13:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey there MRG. So it looks like we really are at the final curtain now, only 5 articles (all beginning with 'W') left in my list to be checked. I have done some recent work to all of them in the hope they will be passed first time. But as you can understand, I am keen to put this whole episode behind me now. and move on. I was just wondering if there was any chance of you checking the few remaining articles? :-) Bleaney ( talk) 16:18, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl,
I'm sorry to bother you again, but I have another question about the use of US government images. In this case, illustrations from the US Navy's flight manual, located here. I have a hard time following the legal "mumbo-jumbo" involved with copyright, so I wanted to double check with you to see if such an image qualifies as public domain. I think a few images from there would be a real help to the air combat maneuvering and basic fighter maneuvers articles, but not sure the proper way to upload them, or even if I can. Zaereth ( talk) 23:53, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Presumably the same holds for CC-By 1.0, by the same logic? -- Tagishsimon (talk) 11:21, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I was just wondering if this is now possible? It says here Wikipedia:Template_messages/Sister_projects#Wikinews that "Moving pages to Wikinews is not possible, for legal reasons. Copying material to Wikinews would put it under the CC-BY license, which violates the GFDL. However Wikinews articles can be moved to Wikipedia." And I recall it was said that the licence change would make this possible. Is that right? Are there any instructions? PS I'm creating Wikipedia:Wikinews as a page to collect Wikinews-related info. Rd232 talk 11:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Laptop thingy? Not a real computer? My laptop -- the only computer I've got -- has just thrown a fit. It's threatening suicide. I'm trying to coax it out from under my desk with promises of a new power pack. Thanks a lot, Troublemaker! — CactusWriter | needles 12:51, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
I believe I have uncovered a small nest of single purpose copyright-violating sockpuppets relating to a film distribution company. My suspicion is that this is paid editing, but I have not tried to verify that suspicion. I've listed the main article and an article about one of the films at the copyright noticeboard, and I'm looking for further connections (and unfortunately finding a bunch of unrelated copyvios in the process).
Here's the delicate part: after I tagged a section of Wonderful World (film) as copyvio of the distributor's site, User:David Shankbone removed the template with the edit summary "revert - The text isn't on any official site, just blogs, so no evidence of copyvio - possible the blogs copied from Wikipedia". He then reworded the copyvio: [9] [10] [11] [12]. Note that this is an unreleased film, so it unlikely that he has seen it. I'm not sure what to do in this situation. And, since he believes that I am already harassing him, I probably should stay away from this one.
Is rewording copyvio in this manner ever ok? Delicious carbuncle ( talk) 17:36, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi again Moonriddengirl, I have a bad feeling about Peak Wilderness sanctuary. It exhibits the basic symptoms of a copy/paste. It was created big chunk of text without a single wikilink. Furthermore it was created by an IP not in Sri Lanka. However I search for original source but couldn't find. Towards end of the article it mentions about the trekking it might have copied from a commercial trekking web. There is a fair degree of chance that my doubts are to be wrong and I'm fully aware of it. I am willing to assume good faith. Could you please investigate the matter. Regards!-- Chanaka L ( talk) 02:47, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
I noticed your recent removal of copyvio content on the page The Colony (TV series, as this edit also removed a lot of the summary information, as well as other, I was wondering if you could help me, or at least give me a clear idea of how to rewrite the material without it being copyvio, and if there are any specific points I should avoid. 125.238.162.226 ( talk) 10:59, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey Moonriddengirl. Do you know if there is a template that can be used to notify users who have moved pages incorrectly? The leftorium 12:21, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi!, I am a sysop from ml wiki, who recently joined OTRS. I learn that you are having trouble with a ticket from ml wiki. Would you want me to take over that and deal with it? Please let me know. Thanks, -- Jyothis ( talk) 16:18, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
No, there is not. yours is the last email I see in the chain. I would like to get that ticket moved to permissions-ml queue, but I dont see that on the drop down. If you dont mind, I will take it over and go thru the verification. Unless the author email (since he is net aware and active) from his official Id linked to the orginal source, we will not be able to approve it. I believe that we had communicated that before itself, as you did in the mail. Lets see.-- Jyothis ( talk) 16:33, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Okies, then. I have taken over the ticket. -- Jyothis ( talk) 17:04, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Would you please remind me how to attribute contributions that are split from one article to another? See Pittsburgh Air Reserve Station (newly created from Pittsburgh International Airport) and this. Thanks! Frank | talk 18:57, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi! Austinmayor ( talk · contribs) has uploaded a couple of images which he calls "artistic renderings" which are basically photoshop-filters applied to non-free images (see File:Artistic rendering of Wes Sims.jpg vs. this image for instance). Am I correct in that these are derivative works and thus can't be licenses under a free license as in this case? If so, how would one go about having them deleted; are they "blatant" enough for CSD F9 or should they be taken to WP:PUI? Thanks, -- aktsu ( t / c) 23:42, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you userfy Todd Friel to User:BilCat/Sandbox/Todd Friel? I saw his program on a new channel that my cable system just added, and I was interested in learning more about him. Unforutunatley, his article was AFDed in April. (I've not seen the article, but hte 2nd AFD seemed quite weak.) Since I'm going to have to do my own reaserch on him anyway, I'd like to put it to good use and potentially recreate the article. The Userifed text would give me a place to start. If I do get it ready, I will use Deletion Review/Appeal to restore it. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 03:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi again. :) Mahboubalishah was nominated for speedy deletion as a copyvio of [13], but User:Graeme Bartlett declined the speedy because the website says "Use of the form and content of this site is free, but subject to honesty." I'm just wondering if he did the right thing (and if that note on the website is enough to decline a speedy), or if we should restore the speedy deletion tag. Thanks, The leftorium 17:27, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Would you care to issue a ruling regarding File:Obesity Med2008.JPG, currently under discussion here? To me, this is about as obvious a non- transformative derivative work as can be, but IANAL and all that. – iride scent 20:39, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Simple. Really. Take you 120 seconds. Honestly. [14] Regards, Piano non troppo ( talk) 13:41, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
Thanks for keeping an eye out. I'm doing the research now to clean up the Stanley Kubrick biography. I'm really curious about how to improve the quality of articles in the Wikipedia. As it stands, the page has a ton of stuff about his films, but you don't a good enough sense of the person. He's amongst the most influential filmmakers in the history of the art, so I figure he deserves better from the Wikipedia. He gets more page views than George Lucas. I wrote in the discussion some hints about his influences, hoping someone would pick up on it, and perhaps would collaborate...no bites. I'm going to try a few more things in the coming weeks to see if I can get a collaborative effort going. If not, I'll just go at it myself. --crm411 17:08, 19 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Crm411 ( talk • contribs)
I think, maybe, that they are fixed. I found a PD US gov't illustration of the hydrologic cycle in Florida and asked User:Kmusser to create a graphic that seems to work. As for the SJRWMD, they seem to be dinks. However, I am grateful for your assistance, though it essentially put me back where I was before (dammit). I have another article that I feel pretty strongly would be FA quality if I could find images, but that seems to be over the top. It's best to stick to obscure topics that were somewhat popular before 1923... -- Moni3 ( talk) 18:36, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Dear Moonriddengirl. I need help again, on getting the page of Santidev Ghose to show a picture of him. I uploaded the picture, taken by me in 1980, and it did upload, far as I can see. But it still would not show up. Perhaps it is waiting to be approved or something. Can you help please ? Tonymitra ( talk) 23:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
I saw your discussion with Theleftorium concerning text copied from from the Illinois State Archives website on those mental hospital pages. That text is a description taken directly from the Illinois Secretary of State's website (which hosts the archival info). According to their disclaimer notice here, Information presented on the Secretary of State’s web site is considered public information and may be distributed or copied. The question is whether that simple of a notice conforms with WP release needs. — CactusWriter | needles 07:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
User:Moonriddengirl/CCI-notice -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:51, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Dear madame !
I have not added any Image and you are advising me it is violation of Copy rights .
furthermore the image there was present before my editing and I did not change or add any image .
furthermore it when you do delete or edit something the image was tempered by your side , I fixed the Html language bug only .
I am getting this in some mistake from your side .
From
KSY . —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
KSY3 (
talk •
contribs) 14:28, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
dear madame !
how can something whihc is History be copy right violation , as I just quoted the history from Certian Hitroy Books and from other Pages of Wikipedia .
I am not Copying and just pasting .
It is just Funny and tell me when you say that , it is violation of copy right can you explain
As the Most Important Topic of World is being denied space in Wiki that can be valuble to reaserchers
I am just quoting from your other Pages in Wiki pedia not some book .
Explain , how quoting can be a Copy right Violation when you demand references .
regards
KSY —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
KSY3 (
talk •
contribs) 14:57, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi MRG, could you take a look here and advise. Thank you. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker ( talk) 01:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I think I have fixed the sentence. Do you agree? Racepacket ( talk) 04:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Could you restore the history of Charlie Zelenoff or delete it as a G4? Thanks! :-) The leftorium 19:05, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi MRG,
Seeing as CW's going to be busy for a month, would you like me to try and work more in-depth on WP:CP? MLauba ( talk) 11:24, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
User:MLauba/CPC. Helpful? MLauba ( talk) 16:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
further info on devils diciples discussion page 24.217.66.219 ( talk) 19:46, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Zoinks, not only was the PROD'd article unrelated to the actual topic - it, well ... sucked. I at least made a more-than-reasonable stub out of it and moved it back to articlespace. Hope it's a little better now. Some of those Minnesota college article are in sad shape. Thanks for undeleting for me. ( talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
DBZROCKS submitted this AfD, but then went ahead before the AfD was closed and wiped the article out, leaving a redirect. I know that we're told to be bold, but given that he's the one who submitted it for deletion, isn't that a little sudden? Or is that normal? Thanks for any insight you can provide. - moritheil Talk 07:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I wanted to take the time to thank you for your help on this item on the Wendy Doniger article, to which I responded on my own talk page. I especially appreciate your having taken the time to post a note on my talk page with such a clear explanation. It was very helpful. Here are two notes I made on the same issue, one on my talk page thanking you there, and another I had posted on the Doniger discussion page a day earlier:
From my talk page to you: Thank you that was very instructive and I appreciate your help in making that edit. Only to keep the record clear it was one sentence that you quite correctly deleted from my longer contribution, which long contribution was repeatedly bulk deleted rather than incisively corrected as you have done. Thanks for getting involved and for helping me. Meetoohelp (talk) 15:53, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
From the Doniger discussion page to the other editors of that page: Thanks for the concern you show for the quality of this article. If there is a full sentence in the article that is found to be a copy of a full sentence from another page please delete it singly. On the other hand, to write an article about Doniger that contained none of the information on her cv would be difficult and of course unnecessary. This article is short not only on facts about Doniger, but also on Doniger's opinions, and conversely long on other peoples opinions. It should conform to what other bios of living person look like as to the relative space given to acts of the subjects, and then to criticism of that person. I think it would be helpful to look at articles about similar people, and I would suggest it should look something like Bart Ehrmans, whose work is similar and who attracts controversy for related reasons. In contrast to higher quality articles in Wikipedia, this Doniger page has the appearance of a blog spot. I suggest we editors should move to a bio with one pithy quote of criticism, and one pithy rebuttal quote, the remainder being a description of her work. There are plenty of internet forums for blogging and opinions and this article appears to have inappropriately achieved the character of those. Meetoohelp (talk) 15:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I am not sure if you intend just to make the technical contribution to the copyright issue, or to be more involved to increase the quality of the article, the later would certainly be welcomed, the article seems to need a referee of some sort.
Thanks again. Meetoohelp ( talk) 16:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
The two proposed guidelines will be eventually promoted with a sliver of voters, and two months later will be suddenly contested by a dozen people who didn't participate until then. ;) MLauba ( talk) 10:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
As you were involved in the case of blocked user Pr3st0n, I thought I should bring to your attention this message: User talk:93gregsonl2#New to Wikipedia from new user FriargateFairy. Reference is made to the death of Pr3st0n which makes me suspect sockpuppetry, in view of the previous hoax on this subject. To support my suspicion, I've just discovered Gareth Forrest's MySpace page has the URL http://www.myspace.com/friargate-fairy . The page User:Pr3st0n/MSN strongly suggests that Pr3st0n's real name is Gareth Forrest.
I've never been involved with a sockpuppetry case, so I'm not sure if that's sufficient evidence to file a formal investigation, or whether we should wait a bit longer to see what FriargateFairy does next. -- Dr Greg talk 19:56, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for your rapid response, CactusWriter. -- Dr Greg talk 22:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I have one article watchlisted that I removed after 7 days on CP, was recreated and the source now states "Copyleft by soandso". Re-list pending clarification or leave it? MLauba ( talk) 08:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl (Deletion Administrator):
I've been made aware that my recently posted article on Victoria Riskin was removed/deleted from Wikipedia website and I am contacting you to "contest deletion" as stated in Wiki instructions, as I don't understand why the posting was deleted due to "blatant copyright infringement." Here is the thread below to explain action take on my article:
A page with this title has previously been deleted.
If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below.
17:46, 2 October 2009 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Victoria Riskin" (Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for over seven days)
Let me give you some background: I currently work in press/communications at the Writers Guild of America, West (WGAW) in Los Angeles. Former WGAW President/member/writer Victoria Riskin herself contacted me a few months ago asking, as a favor, if I could please post a profile page for her on Wikipedia, so I agreed to help her out. As I am new to Wiki and have never posted in article before, I tried my best to post an article on Vicki following Wiki's format/rules/guidelines, etc.
Please note that ALL content for the article was NOT borrowed from other sources/websites but rather article content was repurposed/pulled from from Vicki's own personal bio that she supplied to me for Wiki use.
Once the article was posted, I received notice/flaggings that this article may be removed if I did not include proper citations/references for content, so since all the content actually came from her own supplied bio, I thought the best thing to do was reference content from the WGAW's own website, since Vicki recently received an honorary award from the WGAW and much of the same content was used in our awards press release/program - I am not sure how this qualifies for copyright infringement? If I remove the references to WGAW website/release, will that solve this issue? Again, how can the content on Vicki's article be "copyright infringement" when 100% of content I used came from her own personal bio she supplied to me? Would it be better if you reposted article without external references, as I only included them later as I thought Wiki required me to or the article would be removed anyway?
I would appreciate if you could please advise on how best to resolve at your soonest. Much appreciated, as I'd like to respond back to Victoria Riskin herself.
If you'd like to talk more, I am can be reached at: 323-782-4651 (office).
Thanks Gregg Mitchell WGAW —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggmitch ( talk • contribs) 18:38, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Your service to Wikipedia has exceeded 2½ years, so you're entitled to display this badge. Mgreason ( talk) 19:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Howdy Moonriddengirl!
First, my apologies for coming to you directly on this issue. I am not completely sure how best to deal with this situation and you've been a help to me in the past on copyright violation issues; you have also dealt with the editor in question here. I just reverted edits to Matt Mitrione made by User:Justastud15 due to a large chunk of the edits being copy/pasted from [15]. I placed the standard warning on the user's talk page. I also reviewed the user's talk page as they have a habit of periodically blanking their talk page. This version of their talk page shows where you blocked the editor for 24 hours due to repeatedly violating the copyright policy and having been warned about it twice before that block. I do not know if you want to handle this, third, violation directly from my telling you here or if there is an admin board that would be more appropriate for me to make this mention on. WP:CP seems incorrect as the content is reverted, WP:AIV is wrong as it's not necessarily vandalism (it is but it isn't I guess), and I'm not sure how quickly reports to WP:AN are responded to (not that you may respond to this quickly). If there is someplace I should post a notice, let me know and I'll do it. Thanks for your help with this and for all you've done in the past. -- TreyGeek ( talk) 00:12, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
I (largely) produced this page (either logged in or via an IP address) as the episodes came and went on BBC Iplayer. There is no complete list on the web, ergo it cannot therefore be referenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MGD11 ( talk • contribs) 18:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Some (not all) were copied - after completing the episode list for series 1, I largely left Wikipedia alone. If the page could be re-instated, I would quite happily re-edit them to conform to Wikipedia standards. MGD11 ( talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 19:07, 27 October 2009 (UTC).
I could cope with that! Besides, the episodes on iplayer get rotated every week so a description of allthe episodes couldn't take more than a month... MGD11 ( talk • contribs) 11:33, 29th October 2009 (GMT)
I need to include a reference to Nadia Reisenberg in a wiki article on Josef Hofmann. If possible, please inform me why the previous wiki article on Reisenberg got deleted. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alextierno98 ( talk • contribs) 04:50, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Given this section and your edit, I'd invite you to chime in on the rationale of 1.0 text being compatible. Thanks in advance. Q T C 06:34, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
... and this is exactly the section that will cause the biggest brouhaha . Oddly enough, I predict it will be the pro-Hutchison users who will try to eliminate it. I know from experience -- I got tired of trying to fight off all the trivial infighting with both camps -- but it seems the biggest issue is that Hutchison supporters don't want the word "Republican" associated with her and her opponents do. A political section will need to mention it. Good luck. — CactusWriter | needles 12:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey there...in my brief return to editing, I bring you two interesting cases of copyright violations, 2009 Thekkady boat disaster and Lydia Foy. I've refrained from using the doomful copyvio template since the articles in question contain a mixture of blatant copyright violation, close paraphrase, and paraphrase that is most likely just fine. Is using the copyvio template the right procedure though, rather than bugging you? :) TwilligToves ( talk) 14:40, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
←Okay. I hope I have sufficiently addressed Lydia Foy. There is still close paraphrasing of the court judgment, but I am advised that such documents are not copyrightable. Off to look more closely at the other. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:09, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
(outdent) Thanks for your help with this - I really am extremely grateful. Yes, bad-timing indeed, but no matter. For now, a brief note - 2009 Thekkady boat disaster was put together far too quickly, and I'm grateful for your edits. Lydia Foy I believed was sufficiently paraphrased and cross-referenced; as you said, the court documents themselves should be available under appropriate licence, so hopefully that will address some/all of it. Re. Braille Institute of America, yes, it was indeed BasicallyGood ( talk · contribs), and it was 'way back' in April - OK, not so long, but 15000 edits for me. I've been on Wikipedia rather a lot since then, and would now make sure that I added the appropriate links on the talk-page etc. ( example). Gah, you probably don't need such 'proof', I think I'm getting too used to this RfA thing where I seem to have to keep explaining myself - sorry. Anyway - Braille - I was merely acting to try and help them split the article using summary-style. I hope we can contact them to sort that one out. Re. William Windsor (goat), I've had a quick look at your edits, but not had time to check it all out.
In all of the above, I'll need to spend time, checking the sources and looking at exactly which bits are considered a problem, and why; thus, I suggest that we continue these discussions on the respective article talk-pages. Again, thanks for the assistance. Chzz ► 09:11, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl. Here you removed one of the copyright-infringement tags but not the other. Was OTRS permission received for both sections of text, or just the one? Powers T 13:56, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Here's my lame attempt at a Halloween card (hopefully it will work in your browser). I hope you like it! :D The crematorium Happy Halloween! 14:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I'm not really sure I fully understand what that post on my talk page was all about, but thank you for your concern and efforts. To be honest, I thought he and I were friends of a sort, and it really shocked me to see such a post. I regret that such a think would take place on my talk page, and I really appreciate your help. Thank you, and all my best. — Ched : ? 17:47, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the Halloween wishes, o fairy godmother of all copyright investigations. You're an inspiration to us all. MLauba ( talk) 22:21, 31 October 2009 (UTC) |
Hello, there are some issues being raised here in which we are not sure whether a book has copied some Wikipedia articles or if we have copied the book. Could you take a look please? nableezy - 22:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Hey there Moonriddengirl. I don't have much experience dealing with serial copyright violators, so I thought I would ask you for help. Ironholds relayed to me that Arthur Clavell Salter was almost a direct copy of the Oxford DNB's version of the article. Apparently, this is also the case for several of the other articles that Flaming Ferrari has created. I I was wondering what the general course of action is for cases like these. Thanks, NW ( Talk) 20:59, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
←Home, exhausted, running the program now. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:01, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
←Okay, I have populated Wikipedia:WikiProject Copyright Cleanup/Flaming Ferrari and have found copyright infringement from one non-ODNB (I hate those initials; I can never remember their order!) source so far. The article has been blanked for listing at CP. Since I don't have ODNB, I am going to need some assistance in review. (I always need assistance in review, as we have literally thousands of articles listed at the main investigation page, but in this case it's particularly a problem, since I don't have access to the source.) Once I've verified a few more issues, it may be a good idea to ask the biography Wiki project to help out. (Maybe they will; the opera and gastropod wikiprojects were stellar with much larger investigations.) But as a start, Ironholds, I need your discretion in handling Sir Robert Perks, 1st Baronet. How "slightly problematic" do you mean? Does it need {{ subst:copyvio}} or does it need {{ close paraphrase}}? Can you provide a few examples?
The lack of communication is never a good sign. I've dealt with a whole lot of copyright problems in the year (and nearly a half) that they've been my main focus on Wikipedia, and I've seen a lot of people respond to questions about copyright problems. There are some red flags, and silence is among them.
He received a clear block warning in August, here. What I've found so far predates that. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:55, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
An editor has nominated Dragonfly Forest, an article which you have created or worked on, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dragonfly Forest and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to address the nominator's concerns but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. -- Eastmain ( talk) 17:21, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
I am sorry to see that my contributions have caused so many problems. I thought I was contributing positively to wikipedia, but now it seems the majority of my work will be deleted. As a result of this I have decided to retire from wikipedia. I wasn't aware that my contributions breached copyright, so it's kinda sad to now see all my work so brutally undone. However I realise you are just doing your job. Once again apologies for the mess I have caused. Flaming Ferrari ( talk) 22:46, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, can you advise me on the copyright status of scans from The National Archives (UK)? Or do you know someone who can? I obtained a few scans a while ago (I had to pay for them, although I believe if you go to the National Archives in London, you can view them for free). The scans are of Foreign Office documents (correspondence etc.) from 1947. Can I upload these to Commons, or are they non-free? Would be grateful for any pointers. Best, -- JN 466 14:29, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
Got mail. Skäpperöd ( talk) 21:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
In fact, I had sent you an email from wp-fr. Did you get it ?
Best regards, -- Moumine70 ( talk) 14:08, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the halloween card. I love it! I've finished with the rewrite of Betty Skelton Erde. It turned out to be a bigger job than I initially thought. She is really a remarkable woman. Please use your tool to see if I missed any "borrowed" phrases. Thanks for all you do. Mgreason ( talk) 15:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl! Had a quick question regarding copyright issues on a file a new editor has uploaded (I'm actually having some other semi-related issues with the editor in question, but that's for another time and another place :) ), and thought you might be a person to turn to. The other editor uploaded a movie poster at File:Papadom019.jpg, and under "Licensing" claimed they are the copyright holder of the picture. That seems... well, probably not true. The file can probably stay up under a fair-use rationale, but I'm not sure how to go about changing the licensing permissions/fair-use rationales for a file uploaded by a different editor. Thanks! Singularity42 ( talk) 16:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to revert you but the version you restored was still in infringement of the MSC source. I was rewriting a clean stub while you restored :) MLauba ( talk) 13:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I'd like your opinion on the copyright status of the (deleted) article Grigory Kheifets. It was originally uploaded to Conservapedia and then uploaded here by the original author (with no intervening edits by others). Harej ( talk · contribs) deleted the article a few days ago citing concerns over whether users surrender their copyright to Conservapedia when they upload their own work there (see the talk page). If you aren't familiar with the site, RationalWiki's raison d'etre is criticism Conservapedia - not that I have a problem with that, but the arguments put forth on the linked page are, IMO, completely speculative. As I understand it, Conservapedia would need to explicitly state that contributors surrender their rights to the site - which it doesn't (nor does it imply it). Could you take a look at the relevant license page and let me know what you think? Oh yes, you might want to be warned of pointed anti-WP and particularly anti-WP-copyright policy sentiment on the page. The article itself looks well sourced, so it'd be a shame to lose it. Regards, – Toon 17:58, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
It wasn't obvious that there was a copyright problem with 12th Pioneers (The Kelat-i-Ghilzie Regiment) until it disappeared and its links turned red. Can you please restore it to Wikipedia:Copyright problems so that infringing text can be edited and sourced from material in the public domain.-- FwdObserver ( talk) 19:28, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
The 12th Pioneers or the Kelat-i-Ghilzie Regiment were a pioneer regiment of the British Indian Army. They could trace their origins to 1838, when they were known as the 3rd Regiment of Infantry, Shah Shujah's Force.
... As a reward for its bravery, the name "Khelat-i-Ghilzie" was given to the Regiment and it was made an extra regiment of the Bengal Presidency Army. This honour title was inscribed on its name, colours and cap badges for most of its existence.
The 12th Pioneers fought in the Second Afghan War, at Maharajpore, at Burma in the Third Anglo-Burmese War and it also saw service on the Punjab Frontier. During World War I it served in India and Mesopotamia. Transferred to the Bombay Pioneers after the reorganisation of 1922, it was disbanded shortly thereafter, sharing the fate of all pioneer battalions after the Great War.
Hello Moonriddengirl, website of this New York state government department is not public domain? Talk:New York State Department of Environmental Conservation#Website not public domain?. (Anonymous used the text from website at Chittenango ovate amber snail, so I have removed it rather. I can restore it easily then.) Thank you for your valuable work. -- Snek01 ( talk) 21:38, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
Could you also protect the template {{ Anna Vissi}} as well? Thanks. Grk1011/Stephen ( talk) 00:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, have just noticed that you've taken exception to a quotation in Jamaica National Heritage Trust. Being aware of WP:NFC I would not have considered it "extensive". Bit of a subjective one though. Is there a definition anywhere of what Wikipedia considers "Extensive quotation"? Failing that, what's your personal working definition? -Arb. ( talk) 18:01, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I do understand you are away from your desk today, but here's a question. I noticed a new snail article yesterday, and I welcomed the editor, today however I checked the ref and saw that the text had been copied. One part is not quite verbatim, as I changed that before I wrote to the editor. Do you think what I said was OK? " "Please do be careful of one thing. Today I checked the reference you gave for the snail article, and I see that I need to explain that you must not create an article on Wikipedia by cutting and pasting chunks of text from another source, in this case a website (specifically the IUCN Red List website.) In almost every case you have to read the information, make sure you understand it OK, and then write a new account of it from scratch yourself. When you don't do that, and instead copy something directly, what you are doing is quite likely to be an illegal copyright infringement, not to mention plagiarism. Sorry about that, but this is something we have to make clear up front. It is in fact mentioned at the bottom of the edit page under "Please note:" but I guess a lot of people don't notice that. All best wishes to you, signature." Is that suitable? Best to you, Invertzoo ( talk) 22:16, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
OK, good, thanks to you too. I am glad that I mentioned it to you since you discovered that there are more articles that have the same problem. I wish you all the best with your very valuable work on here! Invertzoo ( talk) 21:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
I have read the SCMP article on Sir Run Run that we were wondering about. See WT:CHINA.-- Danaman5 ( talk) 02:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Please review temp sub page on the above that I have started today as Malone should have a page and the copy vio issue has been there for a while. Thanks. Paste Let’s have a chat. 14:48, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
We'll be baptizing our youngest so I'm not going to be around for the week-end. Could you run the contrib tool on User:Acntx? CSB found two recent instances of copying from the Handbook of Texas online, most recently on Willow City, Texas, and going to the AfDs linked on his talk page, it appears this happened before.
Note that I screwed up last time this happened because I meant to twinkle a copyvio warning but ended up with 3RR warning instead (idiotic I know). There's been a follow-up discussion on my talk page and a statement following the cclean message on Talk:Panola, Texas already. And I just added to the user's talk page after the last CSB notice. Thanks, MLauba ( talk) 17:17, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
This page is awaiting permission to use the copyrighted content. The request has been put out and permission has been granted by content and image owners. I am just waiting on Wikipedia to give the okay to use it. It is in the works though. After permission is granted, how do I go about re-posting the content? LizGere ( talk) 21:39, 6 November 2009 (UTC)LizGere
Thank you for responding! I completely understand why you needed to do what is done for the time being. I have an email back from Wikipedia saying that the permission from IHA needed to be more specific and I suspect they will fill out the template I gave them and send it back soon. Then it will be off to Wikipedia so I can post the content. LizGere ( talk) 22:04, 6 November 2009 (UTC)LizGere
With regard to your recent deletion and restoration of National Museum of Arms and Armour, I'd like to ask a question. As the person who tagged the article at that title as a copyvio and posted it at WP:CP, I was surprised when the article was simply redirected (instead of being deleted and then replaced with a redirect, as you have just done—and as I could have done instead of bringing it to CP). Are there any guidelines that deal with when a copyvio should be removed from an article's history, as opposed to just being excised from the article or overwritten? The information would help me know how to deal with the copyvios I run across fairly frequently in the course of my editing. Deor ( talk) 14:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
The problem I had with the IP editor is that they used the most restrictive default setting on the copyright warning and in essence blanked the entire page. You are saying that I have no recourse for people using that template to blank pages and refuse to discuss the issue in the talk page as stated in the template. It was only after he altered the template settings to stop blanking the page that I stopped reverting him (that and I noticed the big honking "don't remove" warning about the same time). Alyeska ( talk) 00:54, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello. I'd just like to check if you know that WikiPilipinas has forked some 10,000+ articles from the English Wikipedia. So it's possible that some of the text you've deleted or tagged here in WP.en as being copyvios from WikiPilipinas are actually the other way around. Thanks. -- seav ( talk) 01:36, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi M. Could you drop by Wikipedia talk:Suspected copyright violations#Comments on the new system when you have a spare moment, si vous plait? I'm keen on getting Coren to add section headers to empty SCV subpages, but I want to make sure that I don't mess up CP's formatting. Cheers, – Toon 12:42, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl,
A while ago you helped me out with an Arnhem VC recipient that I noticed had a lot of text copied from another website. While I've been expanding another Arnhem VC, I've noticed that this text would seem to be pretty much a copy and paste from this website. My initial reaction would be to just revert this edit, rather than nominate the page for deletion, but thought I'd better check with someone who understands all of this stuff.
Cheers for your time, Ranger Steve ( talk) 13:01, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, true genius is never appreciated! :) Giant Snowman 17:38, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I think you missed The Honors College at West Virginia University at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 October 31. :) The leftorium 18:03, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
The Dying Center was the first of its kind and really only those involved with it have recorded this information. So how does one reference something if the founders are the only ones who have written about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Devi 8 ( talk • contribs) 00:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello Moonwiddengirl ! I've been busy trying to make head or tail of various help pages, in the process I've seen your name crop up a number of times making edits to various help pages, just thought in case you missed it, to point you in the direction of the Wikipedia:Help Project, where we have a few things going on concurrently, but if you're ever stuck in the maze, come visit us other editors who are wandering around there too, it even seems like some sense might come out of it all :) p.s. one of our current requests/tasks is cleaning up Help:Files ... Lee∴V (talk • contribs) 02:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, just to inform you that I have decided against retiring from wikipedia, and have begun to rewrite some of the articles which were cause for concern. If I can be of any help with your investigation please do let me know. Just for the record I have never had access to any of dod's resources in full, the only copyvios from dod's which you may find will have come from searching online, rather than subscriber content or the like. Best wishes Flaming Ferrari ( talk) 03:07, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Certainement; will review this evening when I get back from uni/my political party's exec meeting (9:00 GMT or so). For future use, if you want me to email you my ODNB ID, give me a poke. Ironholds ( talk) 14:27, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Can you protect? Thanks, The leftorium 18:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi,
What should i do to show you that i got the right to submit thread article on behalf of UCB and so you guys dont bother us any more?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucb authority ( talk • contribs) 21:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Alright, I believe you guys are helpful in sharing info! Can you let me edit my page so that i can re-write?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucb authority ( talk • contribs) 21:42, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Alright Dear , thanks for your support btw can i reach you through any messenger if possible?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucb authority ( talk • contribs) 21:47, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Well i need to know how can i make it more unbias ..I am new to wikipedia so just wanted some help from you also i own some forums would you like join it there also?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ucb authority ( talk • contribs) 21:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks dear , I will try to be as what you said but please dont take out the image. I would add reference with the paragraph.
to whom this may concern, there was a terrible misconception on my page in which resulted in a deletion, now i took proper steps to resolve this matter, i was given options and i chose to email wiki the links to my original site bearing my creative commons licenses for my biography and nothing resulted,no user talk, no permissions,anything confirming resolve....please reply with clear info regarding this matter, and why havent i recieved any replies to my emails....thanks in advance. FORCEONE2000 ( talk) 19:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for cleaning Federal Investigation Agency. I assume the job is done so I have marked it accordingly on Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 October 31. If you are not finished with your work then please revert me. Thank you. Bwrs ( talk) 05:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
I will be sure not to continue to post homosexual content within the sandbox. thank you so much for contacting me nicely, rather than yelling. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Neo The User ( talk • contribs) 20:18, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Hiya Moonriddengirl! As always, long time no see. Just a small question for you: is it okay that Cover Album is an article on an actual cover album, while Cover album redirects to Cover version (an article about cover albums themselves)? Is it necessary to move Cover Album to Cover Album (album) or Cover Album (Misono album)? Either way, it's quite confusing ;D I hope this doesn't hurt your head like it does mine. Cheers, Arbitrarily0 ( talk) 21:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
i have recently sent another email to permissions and am informing you of this also, the headline is: THE OFFICIAL PAGE OF "GEE ROCK & THA CND COALITION", so it can be located, please let me know if everything is good with it, and that it was recieved by the permissions successfully....thanks in advance FORCEONE2000 ( talk) 21:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Article seems nice and clean :). Ironholds ( talk) 02:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Article has now been rewritten. Regards Flaming Ferrari ( talk) 16:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
I have come to see (on receiving an enquiring e-mail) that it appears all and sundry perusers of Wikipedia are able to freely access and read personal notes between me and 'an editor'. MasterVerbosity ( talk) 00:36, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
a woman has no right to delete any male subject, you should stick to deleting flowers and topics like pink dresses. YOU DELETED A SUBJECT ON BOXINGS BEST 100 MATCHES OF , HOW COULD YOU WHEN WE ONLY RECENTLY EVEN HAD FEMALE BOXERS, IF I SEE A FILE ON LAILA ALI NOW AND IT HASNT BEEN DELETED BY YOU...THEN YOUR A HYPOCRITE.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.106.89.136 ( talk) 00:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Hey, when did Wikipedia move to Taliban-controlled Afghanistan? :-) -- NeilN talk ♦ contribs 00:41, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
FYI, I have started a discussion at the ANI board in regards to User:Justastud15's habits of uploading copyrighted images and copy/pasting material from other websites. And as a second FYI, I invoked your name, specifically when I brought issues with this user to you recently ( [23]) and you suggested ANI as a possible avenue for me to raise my concerns. -- TreyGeek ( talk) 03:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
MLauba ( talk) 13:48, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl - Sorry to bother you, but I was wondering if I could trouble you with a copyright query? I've been discussing the article Flyfishers' Club with a user Morganix79. I speedied the original version, and the editor produced a new version in his/her sandbox at User:Morganix79/Flyfishers' Club. Morganix79 also contacted another editor who is involved in articles about London clubs, Debonairchap, who created an article in main space which looks like it's based on Morganix79's draft here. Cleverly, I edited the article, and only later realised that Morganix79's work needs attributed somewhere :-/ I'm not sure whether a note in a dummy edit summary/talk page is sufficient here or whether something more complicated is required? -- Kateshortforbob talk 14:32, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, This is my first experience with copyright issues, so I thought I’d write to you to make sure I’m doing this correctly. I see the instructions at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems, but it looks like most reports are quite cryptic, with an article and a possible source, and not much more. I don’t know whether the intended process is simply to identify the problem and let the admin sort it out, but I wanted to provide a little more background. Please let me know if I should be including all this in a report.
Long discussion of issues
| ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
I will go ahead and place the template on the article, send a note to the editor, and file it here. The article is Competency-based education. The editor is User:Rgannonc Editor MuffledThud noted issues including a copypaste concern on 14 Nov here. It is not clear to me whether MuffledThud knew there were problems, or merely suspected. Article editor posted at the Feedback forum Wikipedia:Feedback#What_is_Competency-Based_Education.3F, which is how I became involved. The query at Feedback asserted that there were no copyright issues, and asked how to remove the warning. Article editor removed the warnings. MuffledThud reinstated some of the warnings, but did not reinstate the copypaste warning. I do not know whether MuffledThud is convinced there are no copyright violations, simply accepted the word of the editor, or simply chose to focus on unambiguous issues. MuffledThud also welcomed the editor, but noted COI issues. I looked to see if I could find evidence supporting or refuting the copyright concerns and found this online It is not a straight copy-paste, but the WP article is clearly derived from the paper. I copied a paragraph from each, and posted to the WP:Feed forum to see what the editor had to say. (I’m aware that some potential violations go the other direction; that didn’t seem likely in this case, but I wanted to AGF and see what the editor had to say. While it has only been a couple days, there has been no response. I also posted my response to MuffledThud. While I did not post to the editor’s talk page, if she asked a question at the Feedback desk, it seems reasonable she should expect an answer there. I will post the Copyright problem notice to her talk page. Reasons why this isn’t a straight-forward, and I didn’t nominate for Speedy Delete:
seems like a clear problem, I haven’t checked all paragraphs, and I think the author used the opening almost unchanged, then moved on to more original prose. Is it the responsbility of the person looking into this to check each and every paragraph, and blank out only those with unambiguous problems? I’ve taken the route of blanking the whole article, assuming we can sort it out if the editor is interested.
|
SPhilbrick T 15:54, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
Just to let you know I've created the subpae as noted on the copyright violations. It should be free of issues, as I've just put in the basic data when he was bishop, with the standard infobox and succession boxes. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:49, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
These are the ones that would touch on my project:
I checked them superficially, and only declared the ones clean where information was clearly not a copyright violation (such as basic dates or succession box addtions). Others are likely clean, due to rewriting. The ones without notations will be harder to figure out. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:26, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
I get it now. I was looking for an (a) and (c) in the guideline itself, rather than in the Terms of Use statement. I did read back, honest, but I was looking in the wrong place (obviously). :) Franamax ( talk) 16:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Skimming through the "what links here" for {{ OTRS pending}}, I found American Medical Group Association, which has had the tag affixed to the article itself since creation on 5 May. Since it duplicates large portions of the AMGA website, it might be useful if we actually had permission to use the text. I'm not sure if it'll be accessible in the OTRS system, but could you have a rummage for a relevant document? Cheers, – Toon 20:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
On its little electronic way to you :) MLauba ( talk) 23:17, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
The discussion is at WT:POLICY#list of pages. I'd love to get your input before we make at post at VPP suggesting that we add policy subcats to some pages, including WP:Copyrights and WP:Copyright violations. (Watching) - Dank ( push to talk) 14:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Curious how copyright applies to quoting the conclusions of a report. Its isn't an extensive quote, its a huge report. How is it a problem? I believe the person who used the template was doing so to make a point. Would you please reconsider. Justin talk 17:20, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
An editor is removing text from the King levitation article citing copyright concerns [26]. As far as I know, descriptions of magic trick methods cannot be copyrighted but I'd like an informed second opinion. I checked other magic trick articles and about half of them have descriptions of the method used to do the trick. -- NeilN talk ♦ contribs 22:39, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, we've talked briefly before about copyvio things - finally seem to have some spare time to make a return. Been away for a long time so just wanted to check on the current process for the listings page when things are resolved. When I was previously editing (a few years back), we just deleted resolved cases, but it looks like there may be a cleverer system now, could you let me know what I should do with the listings once I've resolved something? Ta Kcordina Talk 09:28, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Can you, if appropriate, nominate and delete this image? It was used in an article that has the company logo as a fair-use image. This image of the bottles of the company's product add no distinctive value to the article and probably should not be used. I removed the image from the article. It is impossible for anyone not a routine deletionist to make their way through MFD, speedy, and all to find the correct tags. You will know if the image can be used (very unlikely), and how to handle it. Thanks. -- IP69.226.103.13 ( talk) 05:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
I agree to publish that work under the free license *copyright license*.
I acknowledge that I grant anyone the right to use the work in a commercial product or otherwise, and to modify it according to their needs, provided that they abide by the terms of the license and any other applicable laws.
I am aware that I always retain copyright of my work, and retain the right to be attributed in accordance with the license chosen. Modifications others make to the work will not be attributed to me.
I acknowledge that I cannot withdraw this agreement, and that the content
may or may not be kept permanently on a Wikimedia project.
Valid? Seek clarification that he explicitly meant CC-BY-SA? MLauba ( talk) 09:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Potsdam University Library, translation of [27]. But...
Thoughts? MLauba ( talk) 10:30, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. I came across your name on the Copyrights Problem page and hope you don't mind me asking you informally for your opinion. I'm not particularly versed in copyright issues and don't want to jump in just yet and flag an issue on the Problems page. I've just come across a series of pages which start under the main article Next Generation Air Transportation System. This article is based on a FAA fact sheet and is in parts almost a word-for-word reproduction of the fact sheet. Would you know whether the FAA sheet is PD, and if so, whether it is appropriate to largely reproduce it on Wikipedia passing it off as our own work? I'm happy to raise the issue with the primary editor but just want to be sure I'm following policy when I do so. Thanks for your time. Nick Ottery ( talk) 11:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)