![]() | 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 20 | ← | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | → | Archive 30 |
Hello,
Thanks for notifying me of your interest in gaining a source for the fact I had placed on the Sindhi people article. Unfortunately, while a common fact of Sindhi people in Gujarat, this language change has not been properly examined; however; it is a certain fact of life - in urban regions of Gujarat (Ahmedabad, Jamnagar etc..), the Sindhi youth have switched to Gujarati and know extremely few words of the language, let alone being able to write it. Indeed, I wish more studies were done on this language shift.
While I cannot find another source for the language change to Gujarati, here is a writing from the website of the Sindhi Association of UK (SAUK) which comments:
“ | Even after above stated steps taken by the Govt. of India, the decline of Sindhi language in India continued unabated. | ” |
I hope that you understand.
-- 92.8.198.159 ( talk) 17:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl, this is Survir. Can you please merge the following article Rang Badalti Odhani & Rang Badalti Odhni. The correct name of the series is the first one, the one with Odhani. Thank you! Survir ( talk) 00:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Oh, resident goddess of the rights of copy... :-) Can you take a look at this article, particularly the recent edits culminating in this version? I dislike assuming bad faith, but the material doesn't look very Wikipedia-like to me. I've started some cleanup, but the more I read, the less I like. Also note one of my recent edits (more recent than that diff) where I removed the name of an editor from the page itself; note that name is the same as Stuart's husband from the 1930s. Any advice appreciated. Thanks! Frank | talk 12:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Some copyright issues have been raised here at Ani. Since you're so knowledgeable on the subject and good at dispute handling I thought you might like to weigh in. By the way your box at the top tells people they can post by clicking on the New Section tab at the top of the page, but for some reason it's not showing up for me and I don't know if it is for others either. Wikiposter0123 ( talk) 23:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Done. If anybody is watching this section still, want to try clicking on it? Does it work for you? -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moon...it's Joe again :) Been a while. Theres a user this time "Dan56" ( talk • contribs) who keeps reverting when I delete some content supported by citations from a public forum [1]. If you can warn this user that we dont use public forums as trustworthy sources, I'd really appreciate. Peace. Jrod2 ( talk) 18:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey :). Since you dealt with this before you're definitely best. I think everything with just "Nikita" should not be pointed to "La Femme Nikita" because that's so specific, people would likely type it directly. Last time we moved "Nikita (2010 TV series)" to "Nikita (TV series)". However, I've found another one called "Nikita (tv series)" which links to "La Femme". I'm going to redirect to the new one BUT you found problems before, can you let me know if redirecting that will cause problems for other articles? If I'm not clear just ask me to re-explain. Thank you. Jayy008 ( talk) 18:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I am searching for the roots for the two flip sides of thinking: Sense and Reason. Reason is the newer of the two coming from Ratio, or calculation, and Sense goes back farther and is evenly spread out across the PEI span. This is my writing so far: Wictionary, Rational, Etymology 1
I also found that the PIE word for Sense is Menos, which is Latin Minus, but also PIE for searching, pathway, and some mythological ideas.-- John Bessa ( talk) 23:09, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I would like to change my username from Fazlu2010 to wikkan in Global account , Please Help "Achu 06:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fazlu2010 ( talk • contribs)
Omg, he's back! How can somebody have sooo many computers? I thought I'd bring it to you again because you've dealt with it all before. Can you just block without notice this time? Isn't it sockpuppetry but with IP's? Jayy008 ( talk) 10:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
there is a word named Dushman in hindi meaning Enemy.
there are 3 films of same name in hindi made in 1971,1990 and 1998 respectively. Dushman starring Rajesh Khanna is a 1971 film but the artilce in wikipedia is under a wrong spelling dushmun and also this article a person can see only if dushman(1972 film) is written.the article is very much wrong so what can be done? shall i create dushman(1971 film) newly?
dushman of 1990 has veen perfectly made in wikipedia so no issues.
another article is about the third film which has been created on the basis of word dushman itself when infact it should be dushman (1998 film).
i want the three films to be shown as disambiguition when any one types dushman word alone in google —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shrik88music ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
You posted on the Milhist board re User:Дунгане. Would you please quickly examine the section I deleted here and tell me whether you share my concerns about not only copyright infringement but distortion of the source used to push racial POV? I would very much like a second opinion before I start taking any action. Buckshot06 (talk) 20:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
File:Brats4-1.jpg is an image that has been here for a while and it does not have an OTRS number with it, but the email used to show license rights implies there might be. From the email on display somebody asked if they can use it on Wikipedia with credit and the reply was "Sure, no problem." Unless I am mistaken that email, from the photographer, need/s/ed to also go to OTRS before it went from Non-Free to free. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 21:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I happened to stumble upon User:Aranman whom I knew and know that he died at least 1 year ago. I have seen notes to this effect but do you know if is this something that should be noted on his user page? ww2censor ( talk) 04:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your earlier help and clarification on the deleted article on Robert J. Vanderbei. He put the Bio page on his own website back up and put a note at the bottom of that page stating that the material can be used under the CC-by-SA license. I prepared a new Wikipedia entry based on that bio, and it's one of my user pages right now. I put a note on its discussion page about the permissions granted on the Bio page. Would you mind taking a look and providing guidance on whether it's all done correctly? Thanks. Hybenson ( talk) 05:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I just happened across this new article and it is horrible and I think in need of a speedy delete for multiple reasons. This is what I am talking about. It reads like an advertisment. It has the banner on the top of the article that comes directly from the site here which is a copyright infraction. The only references for it are useless and not reliable sources. I looked and couldn't find any either. Then look at the editor who wrote this article. It seems hokey too. I am trying to assume good faith but this time after reading it's really hard to do. It reads like a sock account of someone, I don't know who's though. Would love your thoughts on this and any actions if needed. -- CrohnieGal Talk 11:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
You are truly amazing! I just recently noticed the newly changed Criminals Hall of Fame article, and I must say it looks great!!! It looks so much better after you edited it! I don't even know how I can thank you! :D - BluWik ( talk) 16:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your friendly reply to my copyright question. I've tried to go over and reword the article as best as I could (I made a copy on my user space when it was flagged for deletion). I've tried my best to make it as different as possible, but maths is quite a formal and succinct language and it's hard to change the words without changing the meaning. Could you take a look at tell me if you think I should put it back onto the name space. Here it is: user:Fly by Night/sandbox. Thanks — Fly by Night ( talk) 17:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I removed a copyvio template here, but then I thought I should double check and ask you what is our policy on book blurbs. Can we cite them in their entirety? How should they be referenced? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
How to insert posters/pictures in wiki articles? iam unable to put by myself in the wiki artcile about Rajesh Khanna. Please see the way i have changed the article as i have provided refernces to many of the points but some of the antirajesh and fans are unneccesarily changing and doing edits.They like shshshsh should be blocked i feel as they are having baised opinions.
are you satisfied with the refernces i have provided. more are coming in near future
please see the article as contributed by me Shrik88music ( talk) 18:48, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl! I thought it'd be polite to let you know that your name was brought up at the help desk, and that we all said nice things about you there. :-) Actually, I've seen your work many times previously, and have admired your extraordinary history of contributions here extremely, without having had any reasonable opportunity to express my appreciation and gratitude for your work. So let me take this opportunity to do so: You make this an ever so much better and more pleasant a place to contribute, and I'm grateful for that, and for all your other work here, too. Thanks! – OhioStandard ( talk) 13:14, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Pleasy delete my user page.-- Somerwind ( talk) 14:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Per my latest response, please see my assessment at user:Agradman/sandbox.
Best,
- user:Agradman editing as 167.10.240.1 ( talk) 18:11, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I work for the Foundation and want to resolve this issue. I know that the page has been blocked or shut down due to copyright issues, and we acknowledge that. Is there a way to get rid of the page and start from scratch with original content? Or can we only do that with a temporary page? ticket 2010072910040988
64.51.162.170 ( talk) 16:38, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) Note: refers to International Raoul Wallenberg Foundation. Just a quick feedback, the ticket you mention above has been replied to on 29 July, with recommendations on what would be required to license the material. If this were feasible on your end, it would save the need to start over from scratch. In case the ticket response got lost or eaten by an antispam system, the same instructions can be found at this page. MLauba ( Talk) 17:07, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Our organization doesn't wish to donate the material. I'm just asking, how do I create a new page and get rid of the old one? 64.51.162.170 ( talk) 17:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much. 64.51.162.170 ( talk) 17:19, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, could when you have a minute have a look at this one for me, Eckhhart Tolle front.jpg picture is here online, it appears to be the same size and resolution as ours, the up-loader says that he has communicated with the copyright owner and the copyright owner gave permission that it can be used freely online only and attributed, he says he has sent his communication with the copyright owner to OTRS. I did that once and was refused, they asked me to ask the copyright owner to email them directly...also, if the permission is given the ok by OTRS would that level of control ..only online make it suitable for commons and for usage in a BLP , as non free pics are not generally used in the articles of living people when a free one can be taken or found. Off2riorob ( talk) 21:19, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a bunch Moon, your the best. I will watch for replies and let you know of any updates. Off2riorob ( talk) 00:41, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Ha. You're rather brave for taking that on. I more or less tuned out that conversation as they just seemed to be spinning their wheels. In retrospect, though, I read too much into the source. Since it's a BLP concern, if the source is accepted it should be used only to back up claims made about the guy himself - stuff he did. If it's about other people, then it probably shouldn't be used. Is this statement sufficient, or should I reply under what you wrote on RSN? — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 15:38, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, I am writing to you about a page that is marked for deletion it is called Rachael Lorenz. I have cited 2 sources that are verifiable for reference checking if need be. Am I able to talk to you on the telephone or msn or via email? I have evidence of which I can scan for you but that is not for the public etc. I can provide you my email, I am awful at using Wikipedia to chat on so if you would like to email me please do at (redacted) Thank you. -- Fergasonanton ( talk) 05:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
As the player became notable, would you mind restore the deleted history of the player? Also for Paolo Tornaghi. Matthew_hk t c 04:20, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Quite a bit of this seems close paraphrase from his obit [3]. Not copy and paste exactly, but I'm not sure if it's far enough away from the NY Times obit to be ok. Dougweller ( talk) 14:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Ivo John Lederer was born in Zagreb, Yugoslavia. His father, Otto Lederer, was a lawyer. His mother, Ruza Lederer, was the first woman licensed to practice architectural design in Yugoslavia. In 1941, after the Nazis had entered Zagreb in collaboration with native fascist Ustashe forces, Otto Lederer was arrested for defying a ban against Jews practicing law. The family was able to bribe officials to gain his release.[1]. They fled to Italy where, using false papers, and with the help of friends and the Catholic Church, they hid for three years. ...Soon afterwards, after heading south to Naples, the family which included Lederer's older sister Mira was able to get aboard the U.S.S. Henry Gibbons, a Liberty Ship dispatched by President Franklin Roosevelt to transport wounded American soldiers and 982 refugees, mainly Jews.
Ivo John Lederer was born on Dec. 11, 1929, in Zagreb, Croatia, to Ruza and Otto Lederer, a lawyer. When he was 11 and his sister, Mira, was 16, the Nazis invaded Zagreb and their father was arrested for defying a ban against Jews practicing law. But his mother, the first woman licensed to practice architectural design in Yugoslavia, was able to bribe officials and obtain his release. Using false papers, the family fled to Italy. There, with the help of friends and the Catholic Church, they hid for three years. Then, in Naples, they got aboard the Henry Gibbons, a Liberty ship dispatched by Roosevelt to transport wounded soldiers and 982 refugees, mainly Jews.
Hi :) I wonder if I can ask a favour of you on behalf of the milhist project? We publish a newsletter every month which is circulated around the membership and a few others who've signed up to receive it, and this normally includes an editorial feature. Given your work with copyright issues and in the light of the recent notice you posted at milhist, would you be willing to write an editorial for us? I was thinking something along the lines of how to check articles for copvios, how to report them and how to clean them up, but anything you feel is appropriate would be very welcome. The idea is partly to try to drum up assistance for the cleanup, partly to inform us all better in this area, and partly to supply content that can be reused in our Academy as the basis for a suitable course.
This would be for an upcoming issue (probably August), so there's plenty of time as we don't usually get the newsletter out until late the first week of the following month. If you want to take a look at former editorials there's a list here. I hope this isn't too much of an imposition; please feel free to decline if it is (I know how busy you are!) All the best, EyeSerene talk 11:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
All righty. Beginning work on this and commenting on it here to keep it alive. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:39, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment; I'm also soliciting admin opinions at User talk:Dank#UAA clerks. Would adding some form of clerkship at WP:SCV make your life easier or harder, or would you like to wait and see how clerkship develops elsewhere? (Watching) - Dank ( push to talk) 15:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
It does occur to me that there is one way that official clerks might help at SCV: coordinating volunteers. I'm not sure if Verno or any of our other SCV people would want the added responsibility or how it would even work. But even the good volunteers we get generally need to learn a bit about copyright policies on Wikipedia. If clerks could note newcomers and spot-check them as I tend to do, that might be helpful. (Not to borrow trouble, so to speak, but the one problem I've yet to see in my 2+ years of copyright work here is a bad reviewer who just won't give up. The ones who aren't suitable almost always lose interest quickly. I don't know what we'd do if they didn't.) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Good point MLauba makes about the newbies being less likely to err based on old expectations. :) Also about the concerns with the clerk process. Verno is a fabulous CCI clerk and surely one of the major players at SCV, but he started his work without wide experience, I believe. How would we avoid clerking becoming RFA-lite? If people who did not work copyright looked at Verno's contribs at the time and objected - say because he had not then much content contrib - the project would have lost a great asset in CCI. Speaking specifically of CSD clerks, I'm not sure that they are as necessary as some other fields, since any user other than the creator can remove a CSD tag. Perhaps the best thing I can think of for them might be to review removed CSD tags. We have a flag when somebody removes a {{ copyvio}}, but I'm not sure if we have similar for {{ db-G12}} or {{ db-G10}}. Do we? In those cases, it might be very good to have a reviewer who can take further action. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:44, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Will admit freely I didn't know what I was doing; sorry for creating the mess to clean-up. However, the only thing I find a bit odd is that you reverted my c/p move rather than cleaning it up and leaving it as intended. What is the point of doing it this way, where now I have to go do the move correctly, and in this case, ask for another admin to assist because one page would not move with the tool? Seems like a mighty duplication and waste of effort. Vertigo Acid ( talk) 17:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
He's back! With an account this time... Since it's a sockpuppet does he just receive a permanent block now? He's received lots of warnings from other editors. Jayy008 ( talk) 18:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Incorrect Season 1, airing on these dates, season 2, airing on these dates, season 3, airing on these dates.
Correct Season 1, airing on these dates; season 2, airing on these dates; season 3, airing on these dates.
Also correct Season 1, season 2, season 3.
Hello Moonriddengirl. Avraham suggested I ask you the following questions. If a building is 1000+ years old, is the floorplan of that building in the public domain? Or is it copyrighted by whatever author (or publisher) put the floorplan together 50 years ago? nableezy - 19:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I know this is one of those fun recurring topics and there're a lot of opinions floating around already but I think more opinions (and your nice way of explaining copyright issues) may be helpful. Beginning with OTRS:5251902 we have the blanking of two articles comprising tables of information ( 1976 Lady Wigram Trophy and 1976 New Zealand Grand Prix, listed on the 8th and 9th respectively). There's conversation in OTRS and on the 8th and it's now moved to my talk page. If you could take a look and provide your opinion, or just let me know if you don't want to get involved, I would appreciate it. VernoWhitney ( talk) 14:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Have you any familiarity with http://oocities.com? See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Bot making hundreds of links to oocities.com, when links to Archive.org would be better. Would these links violate WP:COPYLINK? – xeno talk 17:46, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
As you can see here, an editor is objecting to my deletion of a link to his website, saying " My page didn't violate the rules, it maybe further-linked to copyrighted material, but it was not itself and directly." Where is the actual guidance on this? Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 07:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, is that picture good for insertion and transfer to commons now? Off2riorob ( talk) 13:06, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
G'day MRG :-) - I've just been chatting on IRC, where Ottava has pointed out a possible problem - his concern follows;
Hey, chat! Attention! Someone needs to contact Moonriddengirl about massive plagiarism - here - major copy and paste and the rest. It isn't just on that page but practically all pages dealing with the banglapedia - see here
Doing a quick search of any of the pages on that list and compare them with the pages on banglapedia show major copy and paste yet banglapedia is not copyright compatible.
He'd like you to be aware of the issue, so I hope that's cool :-) cheers, Privatemusings ( talk) 03:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay. I've found a couple of links where it served no purpose and didn't relate to a Banglapedia article and one other blatant. Does anybody know how to turn this text into a wiki list? It would surely be easier to work with, since we could mark articles that are cleared. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:12, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
( ←) Bad news, There's probably a good additional 70ish links from http://search.com.bd/banglapedia which point (broken links) back to banglapedia. Adding to the sandbox in a moment. MLauba ( Talk) 08:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, just so you know, you missed the copyvio/plagiarism at Space Research and Remote Sensing Organization. I've decided to go through User:Tanweer Morshed's contributions ( http://toolserver.org/~dcoetzee/contributionsurveyor/survey.php?user=Tanweer+Morshed) since some of it isn't just copied from Banglapedia. Theleftorium (talk) 22:24, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Seems like a copyvio, although there is the usual decent chance it was written by a staff member...? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Is it worth the effort? I've blocked Ardfern ( talk · contribs) after detecting two recent copyright violations from him ( Ballypatrick Forest and Peatlands Park). After reviewing just a tiny bit of his other contributions, I've found more problems:
It dates back to 2005: User_talk:Ardfern/Archive_1#Your_plagiarism. Unfortunately, many of the sources he has used are offline. What do you (and your talk page stalkers) think? Theleftorium (talk) 22:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. I was hoping that you could comment on an issue that someone brought up regarding criteria for redaction #1 with regards to articles that are copyright violations from their inception but are then stubbified. The thread is here. Thanks, NW ( Talk) 13:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate you opening the discussion up and all, but I really feel like its not neutral the way User:Dlabtot and Jrod2 are commenting, the latter at my talk page as well. They quote/cite the same guideline(s) and don't consider my comment, responding defensively rather than to the actual comment. Others' comments as well, particularly the few in support. At times, they make unjustified claims, like the recent one Dlabtot made about one source not being self-publised and giving me a link to a guideline he was citing. Then I responded with a comment that expressed an opposing claim based on a policy I cited from a wikilink available at his link, but then he tells me I am being disruptive and that the policy hasnt anything to do with his link. Its nothing but verbiage and sly remarks, even in the edit summaries of their comments. It really feels like I am just dealing with these two, and I have asked several users recently, pending of course. Sure, other editors have commented, but that was before I cleared up the authorship issue with the source, which some editors expressed as the initial problem. In short, I dont believe it fair for the discussion to be left up to anyone of us since its looking like a 2:1 consensus, if that even is a consensus. If this message did not make much sense or shows me in a troubled light, then you can understand how much I need help with this matter. If there is anything more u can do, I would appreciate it. Dan56 ( talk) 03:42, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
The other day I got a CorenSearchBot warning on Patrick Karegeya. The article is just a first cut and needs a lot of work, but there is no copyright violation. I start quite a lot of articles and have got these notices before, but this one really bugged me. I pounded out an draft essay at User:Aymatth2/CorenSearchBot. Before I put it into a more public forum, I would appreciate sane advice. Maybe I should just let it go. I suppose the bot has some value and the occasional warnings can be ignored. Thanks, Aymatth2 ( talk) 02:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I had not thought about the mirroring issue. I assume that our invitation to reuse includes a careful disclaimer of responsibility for any copyright issues. Knowing the quality of some of the articles, a publisher should check them very carefully before putting them into print. But I suppose it does happen... I am not advocating closing down CorenSearchBot, and in fact suggest it should be expanded to review significant edits to existing articles, since these will often introduce copyright violations that would not at present be detected. There is no way to avoid false positives altogether. An imaginary example:
Assuming John Smith became highly notable, several reference sources are likely to hold text very similar to the above, and the bot may well report a possible copyright violation. That is reasonable, and the editor will find it understandable if they are given a polite warning. My concern is that the bot has got over-elaborate. The false positive that bugged me reported a copyright violation that seemed to be related to two sentences:
The facts are of course the same since the article drew from the web source, citing it, and inevitably some of the words and phrases are the same, but the bot is being far too sensitive. I checked two other false positives, Charles-Auguste Questel and Robinson (Paris RER), and they had even less in common with the source. The Robinson one is amusing: a very short article on a railway station matched to a very short web source on a helicopter company, with the one word "Robinson" in common.
So what I am advocating is to expand the scope of checks by CorenSearchBot to include edits to existing articles and to check more online sources, which will greatly increase the number of violations detected although many will still slip through. But in parallel review false positives like the ones given above and either remove logic that is creating them or add logic to weed out similar ones. E.g. "If the article and source have only one word in common, there is no violation."
As for the wording of the notice, the talk page message is probably o.k., although "and it appears to include a substantial copy of [url]" could perhaps be replaced by "and it appears to copy content from [url]". The banner placed on the article page is far too aggressive, particularly given the current level of inaccuracy of the bot. It should be more like a warning:
![]() | This article may include material copied directly from http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Moonriddengirl It is being reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues. The content should not be mirrored or otherwise reused until the issue has been resolved. |
Sorry for rambling on, but I do think there is a problem. We are so short of contributors... Aymatth2 ( talk) 14:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I like the new wording better, although the article banner is still very aggressive. The change I propose could in fact help the review process. If the bot checked significant changes (whatever that means) as well as new pages, but focussed on blatant copies where large chunks of text are almost exactly the same as the source, it would not just reduce the false positives but would also increase the number of serious violations caught, which are the ones most likely to cause trouble and also the ones most easily reviewed. The more subtle ones where a shorter amount of text is involved and there has been an attempt at paraphrasing are harder to review and less likely to cause problems. With limited resources, better to work on the obvious ones. Aymatth2 ( talk) 15:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
The template just has to link to a page that gives directions. The page can give a much more complete explanation than can reasonably be put into the template. I can't see any reason a bot should not review major contributions. Maybe it could piggyback on ClueBot, which checks all edits for vandalism anyway. ClueBot would pass selected pages or diffs over to CorenSearchBot to check for copyvios. CorenSearchBot would have to be made less sensitive to avoid flooding the review queue, or else should sort out reports into different headings: "Red", "Orange", "Yellow", "Gray" etc., which could be useful anyway. Aymatth2 ( talk) 18:21, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Maybe this should be cut-and-paste moved to a separate discussion page. There seem to be at least three separate threads:
They probably all need more time to resolve. Moonriddengirl, it is your talk page and your call. Aymatth2 ( talk) 00:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I will take a shot at breaking it out it tomorrow. I am really optimistic that a lot can be achieved, but it should be first discussed thoroughly to get consensus. Not a simple problem and we have to stay open minded, but I should make it clear that I am determined to get agreement on the Robinson rule: "If the article and source have only one word in common, there is no copyright violation.". Aymatth2 ( talk) 02:42, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't have much to say at the moment except that the shorter the template is the more likely it is to be read. MER-C 11:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I have a fair use picture question with File:Gilda-Radner.jpg's use in Saturday Night Live cast, in that I don't think it's use is not in compliance with WP:NFCC#10c nor do I think a fair use claim can be made - I have removed the picture twice now here and here but now it has been re-added for the third time thought I should check with you for what you think. Codf1977 ( talk) 18:17, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. I've sent an email to OTRS (commons) about http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maggie_Roswell.jpg and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maggie_Roswell_and_Hal_Rayle_2010.jpg. User:Bastique has checked the email and told me on IRC that everything looks good, but he is too busy to update the description pages of the images. Do you think you could take a look at the email (the title is "Images of Maggie Roswell")? This is the first time I've requested copyrighted content from someone so I want to make sure everything has been done correctly. Thanks, Theleftorium (talk) 17:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
New emails have been sent. Can you check? :) Theleftorium (talk) 07:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I have sent you a message. Please read. AboundingHinata ( talk) 19:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
This AfD hasn't had any new votes for three days. Can it be closed now or do we have to wait the full 7 days of the re-listment period? Silver seren C 17:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I just want you to know that what you do is appreciated. Keep up the great work! Thank you, -- CrohnieGal Talk 23:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC) |
I notice you posted on the relevant ANI thread and as an experienced user I thought I'd ask you what you think it's best to do about the RfC/U I started on this user. My current plan is to leave it up for the normal 48 hours in case they make a very quick return. After that it will either be deleted if uncertified (if it isn't I'll ask for it to be) or very quickly archived. If the user comes back I can always ask for an undeletion or re-start the RfC/U. Does this seem fair and sensible to you? Dpmuk ( talk) 13:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm currently working through putting these articles back to the original titles which correspond to our naming policy regarding disambiguation and capitalisation, but admin tools are needed to move Goms District to Goms (district) - would you mind moving it if you get time? Many thanks! Knepflerle ( talk) 17:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Is it okay to upload photographs of an ancient tomb like these since the tomb is obviously in the public domain? Wikiposter0123 ( talk) 01:58, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello MRG, there's a troublesome one on my hand right now, mind taking a look here and here? Many thanks. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦№1185♪♫™ 17:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi again. You've checked my entry there for Róka Hasa Rádió as resolved but I think you misunderstood my posting to the noticeboard. There has never been a copyright infringement claim on the article page but instead I wanted to point out that this book club thingy is apparently making money with content from WP, not only that one article but they seem to offer loads of books. Of course they don't charge their customers for Wikipedia but for wrapping our GFDL and CC texts into nice booklets. I guess there's not a lot one can do about that but I thought the Foundation might be interested in it. And it might not even be the first such case. De728631 ( talk) 17:19, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Take a look at this "magician", seems like we have a lot of misguided peeps joining WP just to have their own autobiography but only to find themselves flounder in the very hole they've dug, by not being familiar with Wikipedia's editing guideline, policy and rule. Note also the number of image files in question. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦№1185♪♫™ 19:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
How do I put the Ed Fox page back up? I'm working on a second Taschen book and would like to have that all squared away.
Instead of deleting my page, why didn't you try to help me by fixing or adding to it? I don't want to have to go around in circles reading page after page only to be more confused, as Wiki rules seem to be (at least to me anyway)
I am owner/creator of edfox.com/footfactory.com and chromelady.com
Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.166.146.79 ( talk) 22:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl! Thanks for your prompt action in response to my copyvio notice. However, I suspect that I may have led you to block an innocent user. Looking through the article's history, the current copyvio occurred here and was perpetrated by an IP editor with a dynamic IP address (see preceding article history) the day after NeoNeo1087's last edits (10-11 Jan 2010). A checkuser may confirm that NeoNeo1087's contribs come from the same IP address block, but that's hardly conclusive. The most damning edit by Neo1087 is this one in which two paragraphs are copied, but with a citation to the source added. Please could you review the evidence and reconsider the block? Many thanks -- Timberframe ( talk) 13:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
OK, that seems like a good decision based on a more wide-ranging review than I'd made of the user's history. My conscience rest a little easier. Thanks :) -- Timberframe ( talk) 13:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this would automatically show up in your OTRS messages or not, so I thought I should let you know that I just merged some new emails into Ticket:2010072310041103 since they weren't automatically connected. VernoWhitney ( talk) 13:50, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Saw you had done some great work on this one. Re this edit, isn't the whole article a biography? In fact I was discussing this very issue on my talk page yesterday... – ukexpat ( talk) 18:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
So where is the other administrator input? The Wikipedia article has be around for about 3 years, and no other administrator has flagged it as a problem.
You editing is overly aggressive. There is no copyright infringement. There is very little public material on Joe Columbe. A lot of it is work of mouth. So information has to come mostly from one source. Copyright rule said that you have to change 30% of the original article. I have done that.
I will stop contributing to the Wikipedia fund until this over aggressive editing is reversed. WLee ( talk) 20:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl! Thank you for your contributions. I am a
bot notifying you on behalf of the
the unreferenced biographies team that 2 of the articles that you created are currently tagged as
Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The
biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure
verifiability, all biographies should be based on
reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current
813 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{
unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
Thanks!-- DASHBot ( talk) 03:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
Cookies! | |
Thanks a lot for fixing up problems of close paraphasing! Hekerui ( talk) 14:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC) has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
Hi Moonriddengirl, may I ask you for your opinion on this copyright matter? An IP started tinkering with a whole section, putting in spammy links and later there was an alleged claim that all the content had been copyrighted elsewhere. I'm at a loss as I can't verify the (c) claims and I'm tempted to restore the article. De728631 ( talk) 20:04, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay, Daniel confirms that the action was taken in response to an e-mail (I've logged the ticket number at the talk page). I'm evaluating now to see the likelihood of actual infringement in the
material removed. Significant edits that added content found in the version removed include:
Oh, but the killing blow for us is here. It may not be true that every word was copied, but the content in that edit certainly is. There is older material, though, that can be restored, from this edit. Some of the content added later by other contributors may also be okay, but you'd have to be careful that it doesn't build on Doug Adams' writing, as incorporated wholesale. (I was leaning towards thinking this is a frivolous complaint; no longer. :/) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
First I think I need to be part of the OTRS team otherwise I am going to be coming here a lot now. I was checking out some "in need of attention" and the first few I clicked on have been tagged for years with no number. I just dealt with some of them myself as they were fairly easy but having said that: File:Pledgemusicscreenshot.png is a screen grab of a web site. Normally a copyvio but could fall under Fair use. However in this case we have a notice that says an OTRS has been submitted and, supposedly, it says "Authorisation has been explicitly given by PledgeMusic for its use within Wikipedia" which, if that is the case, means it needs to be speedied. However the fact that it also states "Image is fair use as it is provided for commentary within wikipedia article" add a little twist on it. Just as an aside, as you may know the whole "for wikipedia use only" concept vs the "just slap a fur on it" idea has bothered me for a long time. I have been vocal about the fact the foundation set solid rules down about images marked as "for Wikipedia use only" must be "deleted on site" so I do not agree with the more common un-official add on "...unless an editor tags it with a FUR". This image is almost thought out that way, if you follow me. So I am not sure how to tag this one if, indeed, the OTRS says "Wikipedia use only".
Following that up with another OTRS in waiting image. File:Selenagrammy.jpg is an image of the late Selena backstage in the press room at the Grammy awards. What I am wondering about with this one is the statement "Photo taken at the 1994 Grammy Awards at Radio City Music Hall, New York on June 11, 1994, by the mother of user:AJon1992, who agrees to release it under the terms of the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license and the GFDL". As a photographer who has shot the Grammys before I know that access to the press area is very limited, they don't let fans hang out back there. Before anyone feels I am assuming bad faith I say this because User_talk:AJona1992 contains a discussion where the editor explains his mother and grandmother were Selena fans and his "grandmother used to live in Corpus Christi, Texas and began attending her concerts and taking pictures" and that between 1992, when the editor was born, and when Selena died in 1995 they watched TV, read news papers and "kept playing her songs while they clean, or on the radio." After moving to Florida the user says his grandmother and mother gave him "their collections (pictures, signatures, vhs tapes, etc)." So as with another recent OTRS case I suspect this image is not one taken by the mother, but by a member of the media, a print of which was obtained by the mother, clearly a huge fan, and became part of her Selena "collection".
Than we have File:Wash Post MSK2.jpg which was upped March 22, tagged the same day with {{di-no license}} and the uploader removed that tag and added an {{OTRS Pending}} tag the next day. Nothing has changed since.
How hard is it to get OTRS ability? Thanks Soundvisions1 ( talk) 16:27, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
← Just touching base to see if you uncovered anything about the image. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 16:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Raised at User talk:Piotrus. I know my motives are not the purest, due to our long-standing conflicts, so will try to compensate by working on other unrelated copyvio problems. Novickas ( talk) 21:37, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I could cry. This is a really important site, but I've now discovered that although I removed the new copyvio, this [5] edit 4 years ago, most of which is still in the article and makes up the bulk of the article, is from [6] and presumable added by Henshilwood who is one of the main people who has worked on the cave. I should remove it forthwith I guess? I'll try to rewrite it over the next few days. Dougweller ( talk) 18:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I have asked some questions on my talk page about what needs to be done, thank you! AJona1992 ( talk) 16:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
There is a user who in the past made a number of cut and past moves. I think this was due to ignorance not malignancy (I'm spending too much time on English Civil War articles as I am staring to use the patter!) His user name is LouisPhilippeCharles and I have just slapped him on the wrist because I came across one of his cut and past moves more than a month after he was told not to do it, which means he has not cleaned up after himself. His posting to my talk page shows that his English is not the best, and his edit history shows that he is using the move tab now.
What I wanted to know is is do you know of a tool that I can use to see where he has made these cut an past moves by listing of his edits with edit sizes (large deletes followed by large inserts should be fairly easy to see). Just article creations will not be enough because he is an active editor (and may well have been creating articles) and many such cut an past moves are likely to be onto redirects. Thinking about it he probably needs to be informed about copying stuff from the French Wikipeda into the English Wikipedia as well...-- PBS ( talk) 00:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I have now completed the task I set myself see User talk:LouisPhilippeCharles#Warning: Do not make cut and past moves and by looking at the last page of the took I was able to pick on some obvious ones. A list of some previous violations were also produced by another editor which I looked through. They clearly show bad faith by LouisPhilippeCharles. Most of them had already been corrected, but the last one I looked at is troubling because it shows that this problem goes much further back and involves the use of an older account used by the same editor. Since this issue of cut and past copying has been raised several times by different editors with LouisPhilippeCharles, and to date he has not stopped, or volunteer to clean up his mess, I think he may need to be formally investigated. When you have time please take a look at Talk:Marie Louise of Orléans (1662–1689)#The history of this article. to see what troubles me. I will leave it to your better judgement to decide if this editor needs to be investigated further as it could be argued that by putting a note on his edits that he has copied the text from another page that no internal copyright violation has taken place, even though due to subsequent page moves it is often difficult to piece the article histories back together. -- PBS ( talk) 01:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I fixed some obvious ones by going to the bottom of the generated list and looking for large deletes (14 of them as listed on his talk page). But I suspect I have not found all of them. Also I did not look at the user name User:Tbharding. I have just run the tool on User:Tbharding. The first two in the list look OK (one was probably a cut and past move but it was fixed at the time -- I did not look at it closely as it had been fixed so it may have been kosher) but the third entry is the result of a cut and past move [7] that has not been fixed. The history of the article is now split over two articles Princess Louise Élisabeth of France (since a cut and past move) and Louise Élisabeth of France, so as that was only the third in the list there is probably a lot more mess to be cleaned up (under both user names). :-(
Therefore I would suggest that a formal investigation is opened because since I started looking at this users peccadillos he has not offered to helped in any way to clear up his mess. -- PBS ( talk) 07:44, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey, MRG. On this US Army webpage there is a copyright stamp on the bottom. Normally/Often, Department of Defense and US Military webpages are public domain, but it appears the DoD also hosts webpages which are copyrighted. ( This disclaimer stating United States Department of Defense does not exercise any editorial control over the information seems to confirm that it is not part of their public domain material.) Also, this notice on the Army website indicates that they do use copyrighted material on their pages -- but will provide specific copyright notices when it is. Would that be your understanding, too? — CactusWriter (talk) 22:14, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Almost missed this! It wouldn't be the first time that a government source had tried to impose copyright over pd content, though I think it might be the first time I would ever have seen a US federal source do so. Verno makes sense; in the absence of a specific non-governmental source, they are not complying with their own disclaimer. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Hallo Moonriddengirl, to end the copyright problems I made a translation from the Dutch Wikipedia. Best regards, Sir Statler ( talk) 22:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
This is a much better solution. I'm glad the problems are solved. Sir Statler ( talk) 22:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello MRG, there is this particular editor ( Scania N113 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)) who has been blocked several times for his WP:Tendentious editing behaviour on the article page of Airbus 340 and just today his attempt again at insulting people here as well as here ( another one was added after I deleted it, note also that the definition of "無恥" is "despicable" in Chinese language). Please note that his block just ended about 3 weeks back and quite frankly, I'm all for WP:RBI when dealing with such editor who just don't get it. Thoughts? -- Dave ♠♣♥♦№1185♪♫™ 06:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Desk, per his earlier edits №1, №2, №3, №4, №5, №6, №7, №8, together with his latest edit today, should I report him to ANI or WQA? Note also that he has yet to apologise to us for his previous misdemeanor. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦№1185♪♫™ 12:04, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
May I know the reason behind the deletion of Topic Bhutani, if possible.
Regards, Gaurav —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.160.157.4 ( talk) 11:51, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Since the discussion about the Gearslutz source and its use has been archived and at an impasse, how should this matter be approached now? Dan56 ( talk) 11:52, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there...I wonder if you can advise me a bit about a copyright issue; I was concerned about copyright troubles by an editor, so I looked at all the things they'd created and compiled a list [8] - however, I didn't want to be 'bitey' so I just asked them about a couple of specific ones, and also fixed what I could. The user did add attribution on a couple of the copypasted articles.
Yesterday I asked about Doodle4Google on User talk:Mono#Doodle4Google copyright violations, and they did indeed edit it (and wrote fixed) but I don't really think that their edit constitutes appropriate paraphrasing. I've been trying to 'gently' ask them to look at their contribs and fix things. I wonder if you can help at all; I'd be very grateful. Best, Chzz ► 22:44, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I am not a regular contributor to Wikipedia, but have been using it extensively for information search for my own purposes and make small corrections once in a while. I have particular interest in Bengal history and culture related articles and have been keen watching developments in that area for a long time. Recently I saw that you have marked Annette Akroyd for possible copyright infringement. The author of the article is no more active on Wikipedia and I don’t think that anybody else is going to do anything about it. Hang it with dignity. Delete the article.
I have been observing there are two sets of extreme administrators – one goes round placing Original Research tags and the other goes around searching for copyvio. The ordinary contributor is lost in between but the wily propagandists misusing Wikipedia to their heart’s content gets around merrily. See what happened to Bhurshut. You marked it copyvio and the editor (name changed) has quickly posted all the material on a new page Bhurshut Rajya. You probably don’t even have the time to do all the chasing. And what about the content? It is mostly bogus content, so badly written that few would be attracted to go through it. Is this article really fit for Wikipedia? And what about the numerous edits this fellow makes on other pages to propagate his point of view? Who reins him in? No administrator bothers.
Take another case. User:Ronosen and some his sock-puppets have been blocked but he goes on creating new sock puppets and works on Wikipedia at ease. He has an article titled Adi Dharm. It is a bogus article, developed and maintained by Ronosen, his sock-puppets or anonymous contributors (mostly he himself). You have access to David Koff’s book. Does he talk about Adi Dharm? You check Shivanath Shastri. There is not a word about it. But Wikipedia merrily hosts one and the intelligent and hard-working administrators are helpless in the face of active propagandists. And you take great pride in chasing out the ordinary contributor who copies a few sentences unwittingly from some book or website. Great work!
- Ratan Siddiqui ( talk) 07:01, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Um excuse me? but when do you plan on bringing back those RS to this article? AJona1992 ( talk) 18:19, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I've been fixing the vandalism from Surajcap ( talk · contribs) and his various 117.* ip addresses for quite some time now. His edit patterns are obvious: he copies a large chunk of text from blogs or google books, and then formats that in wikipedia markup, and then copy-pastes in multiple articles. I can't identify the source of some of his edits on Pratapadiya and other pages, but these are very likely to be copyvios as well (large amount of text added by this user).
I have blocked some socks of Surajcap and some IP addresses, but later found it easier to pending-charge-protect the articles instead. He uses a dial-up isp from India, and switches ips every day. So, blocking the IPs will perhaps affect a large section of Indian editors. -- Ragib ( talk) 23:09, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
G'day MRG - I picked this up from WP:CP and reverted it to the safe version. Would this be a case for revdel? I was hesitant given the sheer number of intermediate edits and the fact that the copyvio was "presumed" as opposed to "blatant". -- Mkativerata ( talk) 18:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that you had tagged Dhaka City Corporation as a copyvio, and the article subsequently got deleted. Unfortunately, the source you found (Encyclopedia of India Pakistan and Bangladesh) is actually a well known copyvio of Wikipedia itself. (see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_70#Circular_references:_Gyan_Publishing_and_ISHA_Books).
Since a lot of non-copyvio articles are at risk of being marked as copyvios, I urge you to go back into your contribution log, and undo any articles that you thought to be copyvio of this "encyclopedia". -- Ragib ( talk) 18:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, could you be more specific as to why you deleted the Greater Hartford section from the University of Connecticut article? If copyright is a concern please note that the article was written by the same person who wrote the UConn website listing, hence the similarity. I look forward to your response. Sem04014 ( talk) 14:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC).
Hi Moonriddengirl! I have noticed that text was same as on regularly mirrors Wikipedia content after I left message on Coren's page. So, if you can fix this article, that would be great! Regarding some of my past edits, I have copied content in similar fashion before. Usually I have copied myself, for making stubs for some GA articles. For example: I have made stub-article Pontius de Cruce in order to have less red links in GA article Klis Fortress. Any suggestions? Regards, Kebeta ( talk) 14:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Shan't be able to help much in the next couple weeks. (The Banglapedia CCI is what I'd most like to work on, but if that's done soon, clearly others will remain or crop up.) The Old Gray Mare still reads and writes Gray Lady-style content pretty well but balks when asked to do more than that. Now she even has problems reading email. So time for a new computer and/or new connection, but installing and transferring will take a while. For when that's done - a couple questions. Any updates on the WP-specific plag-checker tool that got some research attention a while ago? How does a CCI work right now - do you-all, after deciding it's needed, manually copy-paste an individual's contributions, sentence by sentence, into Google? Do you have any recommendations for free tools that check an entire WP article against Google, including Books and Scholar? (if specifying these might be seen as overly promotional, you or a talk page stalker could send me an email, which I'd be able to read eventually). Thanks, Novickas ( talk) 15:19, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
Regarding this: since the edit in question is by Piotrus, I have to voice my concern here. If you're looking for a neutral third party, Shabazz really isn't one. He's basically Piotrus' ally, having filed Piotrus' appeal and proxying for him in Eastern European articles while Piotrus is topic banned. It would be interesting to know who exactly recommended Shabazz as a neutral party in this issue. Please, try to find someone else if at all possible. Offliner ( talk) 12:44, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd be of no use to you because I don't understand Polish. —
Malik Shabazz
Talk/
Stalk
17:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
|
I have looked into the copyright issue – using my excessive language skills – and find no similarity in the texts, apart from what necessarily follows from the use of a single source. As for the issue of neutrality, I am sure Offliner will not object to me looking at the issue. -- Petri Krohn ( talk) 18:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I do not know what problems you are having with Google Translate. This is what I get. No gibberish, and besides, I do not think that Polish is yet a Scandinavian language! -- Petri Krohn ( talk) 17:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there! I'm wondering if I could have your advice on something. Ziggyseventh ( talk · contribs) put an FAC banner on the talk page of Katy Perry, but nobody has actually initiated the nomination yet. It's a GA, but hasn't had a peer review yet (not that that's necessary, but still) and I believe that FAC is something that should be discussed before it's begun. And in this particular case, this musician is about to release a new album, so I think that any FAC should wait at least a month after the album's release so that it can be detailed appropriately at the artist's article. Ziggyseventh is rather new to Wikipedia, and attempted to start an FAR and a peer review for Lady Gaga simultaneously a few months ago. When that happened, the FAR banner was just removed but the peer review did happen. Presently, I was going to just remove the FAC banner and then leave a message at the user's talkpage. Do you think that would that be alright? Cliff smith talk 16:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
When I was doing project tagging, I found Talk:Middle-range theory (archaeology)#Plagiarism?. Nobody has significantly changed the article since this concern was raised. If this is a copyvio, I may be able to help at least stub it. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
I hope I did that right: Talk:Star League. By the way, do we have a template for attribution to non-editors? There is an article that I wrote using content written by certain scholars who wanted to help expand the article, but couldn't or did not want to edit Wikipedia directly, so they just emailed me stuff "for Wikipedia". I have emailed the lead coordinator in this project to get names and confirm free license permission; when I get it what should I do, beyond forwarding the email to OTRS? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 01:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there,
I created the page donal o'connor which you deleted. I know the information is similar to what is on www.myspace.com/donaloconnorfiddle I created this page also.
Can you let me know how we go about undeleting this page?
Kind Regards
Donal O'Connor docfiddle@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.4.33.188 ( talk) 13:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Why did you delete the rewritten post which had no copyright problem? Elsewhere you said you have no issues if the article was rewritten and so was it done to avoid any possible copyright violation. Till you deleted it and so requested to restore the latest rewritten version ignoring any personal issues which you seem to have regarding this article! 117.254.79.182 ( talk) 07:48, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
At Pedo Basantapur the reduced circumstances of this ancient royal family aroused sympathy of the Rajas of Burdwan, now their relatives who gave rent free estates to them at Bansberia (near Kolkata) and several places in Burdwan and Nadia districts. However, after Kiritchandra’s death in 1740 the Burdwan Zamindari confiscated parts of these lands to west of River Ganga mainly that of Narendra Narayan Ray of Basantapur the father of Bharatchandra Ray, ‘Raygunakar’, 18th century Bengali poet, who fled to his estate in Nadia under Raja Krishnachandra of Krishnanagar. [1]
At Pedo Basantapur the reduced circumstances of this ancient royal family of Bhurshut aroused sympathy of the Rajas of Burdwan, now their relatives who gave rent free estates to them at Bansberia (near Kolkata) and several places of Burdwan and Nadia districts. However, after Kiritchandra’s death in 1740 the Burdwan Zamindari confiscated parts of these lands to west of River Ganga mainly of Narendra Narayuan Ray of Basantapur the father of Bharatchandra Ray, ‘Raygunakar’, 18th century Bengali poet, who went to his estate in Nadia under Raja Krishnachandra of Krishnanagar. [1]
For the disrupting bit on my school IP. Hinata talk 16:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to see a template like the current copy/paste template but not suggesting copyvio but saying that a substantial part of the article has been copied from ... and advising what should be done, eg rewrite prose, try to find more current sources, etc. I recently spent some time at Kohen Gadol removing material I'd found in a book, only to then discover that the book was composed of material from the Jewish Encyclopedia. I don't think the small template at the bottom of articles is sufficient - it's tiny and gives no guidance to editors, and I think that any article largely based on such old sources needs the standard type of template we give to other articles with various problems and that I can automatically tag. What do you think? Dougweller ( talk) 16:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I wonder if you might give your opinion on an argument regarding fair use of cited material being made here/ here, or at least let me know if my rebuttal is sound. – xeno talk 17:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Please unblock me- Ramesh vyas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.94.133.1 ( talk) 19:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, regarding our discussion yesterday on image authorisations of Derek Ridgers and Danny Flynn, you asked me to leave any further message for you here:
Well, I've received a forwarded email from Mr Flynn saying that he's replied to the Wikipedia email - (ref: [Ticket#2010052710028115]) - confirming his authorisation of the images. BUT I noticed in the Wiki email sent in to him order to confirm identity, you/Wikipedia were also emailing Mr Flynn through www.dannyflynn.com - but that is a DIFFERENT Danny Flynn! That is the website of an illustrator of the same name (he also has a Wikipedia entry), so no wonder you received no reply. It seems that Mr Flynn (our Mr Flynn, the printer) did not notice that part of your email to him. So I've asked him to reply to that email as well, pointing out that error. There must be some other way to confirm identity... -- Affable Familiar ( talk) Affable Familiar ( talk) 23:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Can you run a check on the image in this IFD? File:MichaelErnestLewis.jpg. There is an OTRS number for other images upped by the same editor that are of the same subject that were provided by the mother of the subject. Perhaps it was left off this image? OTRS Ticket Number check. Thanks - and guess I will be around her more again with these types of things. :) Soundvisions1 ( talk) 15:41, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, Thank you so much for reviewing the Lighthouse of Houston site I put together. I actually posted this entry with the permission of the Lighthouse of Houston President. We respectfully request that you please reactivate the Lighthouse of Houston Wikipedia entry. Lighthouse supporters would very much like to have a presence on Wikipedia, as I know so many other Lighthouse sites in the US can be found on here. I would be more than happy to put you directly in touch with the Lighthouse of Houston President. Can you please advise me on the best way to move forward? Again, thank you! I am watchlisting this post and look forward to your response. DoubleDimond DoubleDimond ( talk) 16:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much! I think we will start with an email from the President (with the recommended language) to the above address. If it is OK, as suggested above, I will let you know when I send it. Thank you again!!!! DoubleDimond ( talk) 19:14, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi...one more quick question. I am helping the Lighthouse fill out the form to submit and just would like to please know the URL that I should submit to them. I'm assuming I submit the URL to the page you removed? If so, can you please provide me with this? I cannot find it anywhere now. Thank you! DoubleDimond ( talk) 19:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Great! We will include that! Thanks! DoubleDimond ( talk) 19:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi again! I just wanted to let you know that the Lighthouse of Houston President Gibson M. DuTerroil just sent the e-mail to the Wikipedia permissions address. I know you said you would be kind of enough to be on the lookout for it if I told you when he sent it. In addition, he included the link to their logo as there was a copyright statement on that as well. Is there anyway you could resolve both of these issues, or is it best for me to take another route regarding the logo? Thank you so much again for everything!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by DoubleDimond ( talk • contribs) 17:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, he forwarded the e-mail to me, and I definitely will respect the real name issue and your privacy. He did send a new e-mail that will hopefully solve the remaining issue. You should have it now if you get a chance to look, and please let me know if you did not receive it. I do truly appreciate your responsiveness and help with this!! DoubleDimond ( talk) 19:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you!!!! I will look for it now! I really appreciate all your assistance and guidance in how to work through the process! DoubleDimond ( talk) 15:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 20 | ← | Archive 23 | Archive 24 | Archive 25 | Archive 26 | Archive 27 | → | Archive 30 |
Hello,
Thanks for notifying me of your interest in gaining a source for the fact I had placed on the Sindhi people article. Unfortunately, while a common fact of Sindhi people in Gujarat, this language change has not been properly examined; however; it is a certain fact of life - in urban regions of Gujarat (Ahmedabad, Jamnagar etc..), the Sindhi youth have switched to Gujarati and know extremely few words of the language, let alone being able to write it. Indeed, I wish more studies were done on this language shift.
While I cannot find another source for the language change to Gujarati, here is a writing from the website of the Sindhi Association of UK (SAUK) which comments:
“ | Even after above stated steps taken by the Govt. of India, the decline of Sindhi language in India continued unabated. | ” |
I hope that you understand.
-- 92.8.198.159 ( talk) 17:46, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl, this is Survir. Can you please merge the following article Rang Badalti Odhani & Rang Badalti Odhni. The correct name of the series is the first one, the one with Odhani. Thank you! Survir ( talk) 00:19, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Oh, resident goddess of the rights of copy... :-) Can you take a look at this article, particularly the recent edits culminating in this version? I dislike assuming bad faith, but the material doesn't look very Wikipedia-like to me. I've started some cleanup, but the more I read, the less I like. Also note one of my recent edits (more recent than that diff) where I removed the name of an editor from the page itself; note that name is the same as Stuart's husband from the 1930s. Any advice appreciated. Thanks! Frank | talk 12:17, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Some copyright issues have been raised here at Ani. Since you're so knowledgeable on the subject and good at dispute handling I thought you might like to weigh in. By the way your box at the top tells people they can post by clicking on the New Section tab at the top of the page, but for some reason it's not showing up for me and I don't know if it is for others either. Wikiposter0123 ( talk) 23:39, 2 August 2010 (UTC)
Done. If anybody is watching this section still, want to try clicking on it? Does it work for you? -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:02, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moon...it's Joe again :) Been a while. Theres a user this time "Dan56" ( talk • contribs) who keeps reverting when I delete some content supported by citations from a public forum [1]. If you can warn this user that we dont use public forums as trustworthy sources, I'd really appreciate. Peace. Jrod2 ( talk) 18:06, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey :). Since you dealt with this before you're definitely best. I think everything with just "Nikita" should not be pointed to "La Femme Nikita" because that's so specific, people would likely type it directly. Last time we moved "Nikita (2010 TV series)" to "Nikita (TV series)". However, I've found another one called "Nikita (tv series)" which links to "La Femme". I'm going to redirect to the new one BUT you found problems before, can you let me know if redirecting that will cause problems for other articles? If I'm not clear just ask me to re-explain. Thank you. Jayy008 ( talk) 18:41, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I am searching for the roots for the two flip sides of thinking: Sense and Reason. Reason is the newer of the two coming from Ratio, or calculation, and Sense goes back farther and is evenly spread out across the PEI span. This is my writing so far: Wictionary, Rational, Etymology 1
I also found that the PIE word for Sense is Menos, which is Latin Minus, but also PIE for searching, pathway, and some mythological ideas.-- John Bessa ( talk) 23:09, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I would like to change my username from Fazlu2010 to wikkan in Global account , Please Help "Achu 06:49, 5 August 2010 (UTC)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fazlu2010 ( talk • contribs)
Omg, he's back! How can somebody have sooo many computers? I thought I'd bring it to you again because you've dealt with it all before. Can you just block without notice this time? Isn't it sockpuppetry but with IP's? Jayy008 ( talk) 10:33, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
there is a word named Dushman in hindi meaning Enemy.
there are 3 films of same name in hindi made in 1971,1990 and 1998 respectively. Dushman starring Rajesh Khanna is a 1971 film but the artilce in wikipedia is under a wrong spelling dushmun and also this article a person can see only if dushman(1972 film) is written.the article is very much wrong so what can be done? shall i create dushman(1971 film) newly?
dushman of 1990 has veen perfectly made in wikipedia so no issues.
another article is about the third film which has been created on the basis of word dushman itself when infact it should be dushman (1998 film).
i want the three films to be shown as disambiguition when any one types dushman word alone in google —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shrik88music ( talk • contribs) 17:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
You posted on the Milhist board re User:Дунгане. Would you please quickly examine the section I deleted here and tell me whether you share my concerns about not only copyright infringement but distortion of the source used to push racial POV? I would very much like a second opinion before I start taking any action. Buckshot06 (talk) 20:57, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
File:Brats4-1.jpg is an image that has been here for a while and it does not have an OTRS number with it, but the email used to show license rights implies there might be. From the email on display somebody asked if they can use it on Wikipedia with credit and the reply was "Sure, no problem." Unless I am mistaken that email, from the photographer, need/s/ed to also go to OTRS before it went from Non-Free to free. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 21:39, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I happened to stumble upon User:Aranman whom I knew and know that he died at least 1 year ago. I have seen notes to this effect but do you know if is this something that should be noted on his user page? ww2censor ( talk) 04:17, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your earlier help and clarification on the deleted article on Robert J. Vanderbei. He put the Bio page on his own website back up and put a note at the bottom of that page stating that the material can be used under the CC-by-SA license. I prepared a new Wikipedia entry based on that bio, and it's one of my user pages right now. I put a note on its discussion page about the permissions granted on the Bio page. Would you mind taking a look and providing guidance on whether it's all done correctly? Thanks. Hybenson ( talk) 05:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I just happened across this new article and it is horrible and I think in need of a speedy delete for multiple reasons. This is what I am talking about. It reads like an advertisment. It has the banner on the top of the article that comes directly from the site here which is a copyright infraction. The only references for it are useless and not reliable sources. I looked and couldn't find any either. Then look at the editor who wrote this article. It seems hokey too. I am trying to assume good faith but this time after reading it's really hard to do. It reads like a sock account of someone, I don't know who's though. Would love your thoughts on this and any actions if needed. -- CrohnieGal Talk 11:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
You are truly amazing! I just recently noticed the newly changed Criminals Hall of Fame article, and I must say it looks great!!! It looks so much better after you edited it! I don't even know how I can thank you! :D - BluWik ( talk) 16:08, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a lot for your friendly reply to my copyright question. I've tried to go over and reword the article as best as I could (I made a copy on my user space when it was flagged for deletion). I've tried my best to make it as different as possible, but maths is quite a formal and succinct language and it's hard to change the words without changing the meaning. Could you take a look at tell me if you think I should put it back onto the name space. Here it is: user:Fly by Night/sandbox. Thanks — Fly by Night ( talk) 17:50, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
I removed a copyvio template here, but then I thought I should double check and ask you what is our policy on book blurbs. Can we cite them in their entirety? How should they be referenced? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 18:34, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
How to insert posters/pictures in wiki articles? iam unable to put by myself in the wiki artcile about Rajesh Khanna. Please see the way i have changed the article as i have provided refernces to many of the points but some of the antirajesh and fans are unneccesarily changing and doing edits.They like shshshsh should be blocked i feel as they are having baised opinions.
are you satisfied with the refernces i have provided. more are coming in near future
please see the article as contributed by me Shrik88music ( talk) 18:48, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, Moonriddengirl! I thought it'd be polite to let you know that your name was brought up at the help desk, and that we all said nice things about you there. :-) Actually, I've seen your work many times previously, and have admired your extraordinary history of contributions here extremely, without having had any reasonable opportunity to express my appreciation and gratitude for your work. So let me take this opportunity to do so: You make this an ever so much better and more pleasant a place to contribute, and I'm grateful for that, and for all your other work here, too. Thanks! – OhioStandard ( talk) 13:14, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Pleasy delete my user page.-- Somerwind ( talk) 14:23, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Per my latest response, please see my assessment at user:Agradman/sandbox.
Best,
- user:Agradman editing as 167.10.240.1 ( talk) 18:11, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
I work for the Foundation and want to resolve this issue. I know that the page has been blocked or shut down due to copyright issues, and we acknowledge that. Is there a way to get rid of the page and start from scratch with original content? Or can we only do that with a temporary page? ticket 2010072910040988
64.51.162.170 ( talk) 16:38, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
( talk page stalker) Note: refers to International Raoul Wallenberg Foundation. Just a quick feedback, the ticket you mention above has been replied to on 29 July, with recommendations on what would be required to license the material. If this were feasible on your end, it would save the need to start over from scratch. In case the ticket response got lost or eaten by an antispam system, the same instructions can be found at this page. MLauba ( Talk) 17:07, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Our organization doesn't wish to donate the material. I'm just asking, how do I create a new page and get rid of the old one? 64.51.162.170 ( talk) 17:12, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you very much. 64.51.162.170 ( talk) 17:19, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, could when you have a minute have a look at this one for me, Eckhhart Tolle front.jpg picture is here online, it appears to be the same size and resolution as ours, the up-loader says that he has communicated with the copyright owner and the copyright owner gave permission that it can be used freely online only and attributed, he says he has sent his communication with the copyright owner to OTRS. I did that once and was refused, they asked me to ask the copyright owner to email them directly...also, if the permission is given the ok by OTRS would that level of control ..only online make it suitable for commons and for usage in a BLP , as non free pics are not generally used in the articles of living people when a free one can be taken or found. Off2riorob ( talk) 21:19, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks a bunch Moon, your the best. I will watch for replies and let you know of any updates. Off2riorob ( talk) 00:41, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Ha. You're rather brave for taking that on. I more or less tuned out that conversation as they just seemed to be spinning their wheels. In retrospect, though, I read too much into the source. Since it's a BLP concern, if the source is accepted it should be used only to back up claims made about the guy himself - stuff he did. If it's about other people, then it probably shouldn't be used. Is this statement sufficient, or should I reply under what you wrote on RSN? — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 15:38, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, I am writing to you about a page that is marked for deletion it is called Rachael Lorenz. I have cited 2 sources that are verifiable for reference checking if need be. Am I able to talk to you on the telephone or msn or via email? I have evidence of which I can scan for you but that is not for the public etc. I can provide you my email, I am awful at using Wikipedia to chat on so if you would like to email me please do at (redacted) Thank you. -- Fergasonanton ( talk) 05:09, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
As the player became notable, would you mind restore the deleted history of the player? Also for Paolo Tornaghi. Matthew_hk t c 04:20, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Quite a bit of this seems close paraphrase from his obit [3]. Not copy and paste exactly, but I'm not sure if it's far enough away from the NY Times obit to be ok. Dougweller ( talk) 14:14, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Ivo John Lederer was born in Zagreb, Yugoslavia. His father, Otto Lederer, was a lawyer. His mother, Ruza Lederer, was the first woman licensed to practice architectural design in Yugoslavia. In 1941, after the Nazis had entered Zagreb in collaboration with native fascist Ustashe forces, Otto Lederer was arrested for defying a ban against Jews practicing law. The family was able to bribe officials to gain his release.[1]. They fled to Italy where, using false papers, and with the help of friends and the Catholic Church, they hid for three years. ...Soon afterwards, after heading south to Naples, the family which included Lederer's older sister Mira was able to get aboard the U.S.S. Henry Gibbons, a Liberty Ship dispatched by President Franklin Roosevelt to transport wounded American soldiers and 982 refugees, mainly Jews.
Ivo John Lederer was born on Dec. 11, 1929, in Zagreb, Croatia, to Ruza and Otto Lederer, a lawyer. When he was 11 and his sister, Mira, was 16, the Nazis invaded Zagreb and their father was arrested for defying a ban against Jews practicing law. But his mother, the first woman licensed to practice architectural design in Yugoslavia, was able to bribe officials and obtain his release. Using false papers, the family fled to Italy. There, with the help of friends and the Catholic Church, they hid for three years. Then, in Naples, they got aboard the Henry Gibbons, a Liberty ship dispatched by Roosevelt to transport wounded soldiers and 982 refugees, mainly Jews.
Hi :) I wonder if I can ask a favour of you on behalf of the milhist project? We publish a newsletter every month which is circulated around the membership and a few others who've signed up to receive it, and this normally includes an editorial feature. Given your work with copyright issues and in the light of the recent notice you posted at milhist, would you be willing to write an editorial for us? I was thinking something along the lines of how to check articles for copvios, how to report them and how to clean them up, but anything you feel is appropriate would be very welcome. The idea is partly to try to drum up assistance for the cleanup, partly to inform us all better in this area, and partly to supply content that can be reused in our Academy as the basis for a suitable course.
This would be for an upcoming issue (probably August), so there's plenty of time as we don't usually get the newsletter out until late the first week of the following month. If you want to take a look at former editorials there's a list here. I hope this isn't too much of an imposition; please feel free to decline if it is (I know how busy you are!) All the best, EyeSerene talk 11:46, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
All righty. Beginning work on this and commenting on it here to keep it alive. :) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:39, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment; I'm also soliciting admin opinions at User talk:Dank#UAA clerks. Would adding some form of clerkship at WP:SCV make your life easier or harder, or would you like to wait and see how clerkship develops elsewhere? (Watching) - Dank ( push to talk) 15:26, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
It does occur to me that there is one way that official clerks might help at SCV: coordinating volunteers. I'm not sure if Verno or any of our other SCV people would want the added responsibility or how it would even work. But even the good volunteers we get generally need to learn a bit about copyright policies on Wikipedia. If clerks could note newcomers and spot-check them as I tend to do, that might be helpful. (Not to borrow trouble, so to speak, but the one problem I've yet to see in my 2+ years of copyright work here is a bad reviewer who just won't give up. The ones who aren't suitable almost always lose interest quickly. I don't know what we'd do if they didn't.) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:10, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
Good point MLauba makes about the newbies being less likely to err based on old expectations. :) Also about the concerns with the clerk process. Verno is a fabulous CCI clerk and surely one of the major players at SCV, but he started his work without wide experience, I believe. How would we avoid clerking becoming RFA-lite? If people who did not work copyright looked at Verno's contribs at the time and objected - say because he had not then much content contrib - the project would have lost a great asset in CCI. Speaking specifically of CSD clerks, I'm not sure that they are as necessary as some other fields, since any user other than the creator can remove a CSD tag. Perhaps the best thing I can think of for them might be to review removed CSD tags. We have a flag when somebody removes a {{ copyvio}}, but I'm not sure if we have similar for {{ db-G12}} or {{ db-G10}}. Do we? In those cases, it might be very good to have a reviewer who can take further action. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:44, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Will admit freely I didn't know what I was doing; sorry for creating the mess to clean-up. However, the only thing I find a bit odd is that you reverted my c/p move rather than cleaning it up and leaving it as intended. What is the point of doing it this way, where now I have to go do the move correctly, and in this case, ask for another admin to assist because one page would not move with the tool? Seems like a mighty duplication and waste of effort. Vertigo Acid ( talk) 17:31, 11 August 2010 (UTC)
He's back! With an account this time... Since it's a sockpuppet does he just receive a permanent block now? He's received lots of warnings from other editors. Jayy008 ( talk) 18:34, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Incorrect Season 1, airing on these dates, season 2, airing on these dates, season 3, airing on these dates.
Correct Season 1, airing on these dates; season 2, airing on these dates; season 3, airing on these dates.
Also correct Season 1, season 2, season 3.
Hello Moonriddengirl. Avraham suggested I ask you the following questions. If a building is 1000+ years old, is the floorplan of that building in the public domain? Or is it copyrighted by whatever author (or publisher) put the floorplan together 50 years ago? nableezy - 19:03, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
I know this is one of those fun recurring topics and there're a lot of opinions floating around already but I think more opinions (and your nice way of explaining copyright issues) may be helpful. Beginning with OTRS:5251902 we have the blanking of two articles comprising tables of information ( 1976 Lady Wigram Trophy and 1976 New Zealand Grand Prix, listed on the 8th and 9th respectively). There's conversation in OTRS and on the 8th and it's now moved to my talk page. If you could take a look and provide your opinion, or just let me know if you don't want to get involved, I would appreciate it. VernoWhitney ( talk) 14:40, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Have you any familiarity with http://oocities.com? See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Bot making hundreds of links to oocities.com, when links to Archive.org would be better. Would these links violate WP:COPYLINK? – xeno talk 17:46, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
As you can see here, an editor is objecting to my deletion of a link to his website, saying " My page didn't violate the rules, it maybe further-linked to copyrighted material, but it was not itself and directly." Where is the actual guidance on this? Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 07:22, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, is that picture good for insertion and transfer to commons now? Off2riorob ( talk) 13:06, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
G'day MRG :-) - I've just been chatting on IRC, where Ottava has pointed out a possible problem - his concern follows;
Hey, chat! Attention! Someone needs to contact Moonriddengirl about massive plagiarism - here - major copy and paste and the rest. It isn't just on that page but practically all pages dealing with the banglapedia - see here
Doing a quick search of any of the pages on that list and compare them with the pages on banglapedia show major copy and paste yet banglapedia is not copyright compatible.
He'd like you to be aware of the issue, so I hope that's cool :-) cheers, Privatemusings ( talk) 03:42, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay. I've found a couple of links where it served no purpose and didn't relate to a Banglapedia article and one other blatant. Does anybody know how to turn this text into a wiki list? It would surely be easier to work with, since we could mark articles that are cleared. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:12, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
( ←) Bad news, There's probably a good additional 70ish links from http://search.com.bd/banglapedia which point (broken links) back to banglapedia. Adding to the sandbox in a moment. MLauba ( Talk) 08:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, just so you know, you missed the copyvio/plagiarism at Space Research and Remote Sensing Organization. I've decided to go through User:Tanweer Morshed's contributions ( http://toolserver.org/~dcoetzee/contributionsurveyor/survey.php?user=Tanweer+Morshed) since some of it isn't just copied from Banglapedia. Theleftorium (talk) 22:24, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
Seems like a copyvio, although there is the usual decent chance it was written by a staff member...? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 17:12, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Is it worth the effort? I've blocked Ardfern ( talk · contribs) after detecting two recent copyright violations from him ( Ballypatrick Forest and Peatlands Park). After reviewing just a tiny bit of his other contributions, I've found more problems:
It dates back to 2005: User_talk:Ardfern/Archive_1#Your_plagiarism. Unfortunately, many of the sources he has used are offline. What do you (and your talk page stalkers) think? Theleftorium (talk) 22:43, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. I was hoping that you could comment on an issue that someone brought up regarding criteria for redaction #1 with regards to articles that are copyright violations from their inception but are then stubbified. The thread is here. Thanks, NW ( Talk) 13:41, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate you opening the discussion up and all, but I really feel like its not neutral the way User:Dlabtot and Jrod2 are commenting, the latter at my talk page as well. They quote/cite the same guideline(s) and don't consider my comment, responding defensively rather than to the actual comment. Others' comments as well, particularly the few in support. At times, they make unjustified claims, like the recent one Dlabtot made about one source not being self-publised and giving me a link to a guideline he was citing. Then I responded with a comment that expressed an opposing claim based on a policy I cited from a wikilink available at his link, but then he tells me I am being disruptive and that the policy hasnt anything to do with his link. Its nothing but verbiage and sly remarks, even in the edit summaries of their comments. It really feels like I am just dealing with these two, and I have asked several users recently, pending of course. Sure, other editors have commented, but that was before I cleared up the authorship issue with the source, which some editors expressed as the initial problem. In short, I dont believe it fair for the discussion to be left up to anyone of us since its looking like a 2:1 consensus, if that even is a consensus. If this message did not make much sense or shows me in a troubled light, then you can understand how much I need help with this matter. If there is anything more u can do, I would appreciate it. Dan56 ( talk) 03:42, 10 August 2010 (UTC)
The other day I got a CorenSearchBot warning on Patrick Karegeya. The article is just a first cut and needs a lot of work, but there is no copyright violation. I start quite a lot of articles and have got these notices before, but this one really bugged me. I pounded out an draft essay at User:Aymatth2/CorenSearchBot. Before I put it into a more public forum, I would appreciate sane advice. Maybe I should just let it go. I suppose the bot has some value and the occasional warnings can be ignored. Thanks, Aymatth2 ( talk) 02:10, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. I had not thought about the mirroring issue. I assume that our invitation to reuse includes a careful disclaimer of responsibility for any copyright issues. Knowing the quality of some of the articles, a publisher should check them very carefully before putting them into print. But I suppose it does happen... I am not advocating closing down CorenSearchBot, and in fact suggest it should be expanded to review significant edits to existing articles, since these will often introduce copyright violations that would not at present be detected. There is no way to avoid false positives altogether. An imaginary example:
Assuming John Smith became highly notable, several reference sources are likely to hold text very similar to the above, and the bot may well report a possible copyright violation. That is reasonable, and the editor will find it understandable if they are given a polite warning. My concern is that the bot has got over-elaborate. The false positive that bugged me reported a copyright violation that seemed to be related to two sentences:
The facts are of course the same since the article drew from the web source, citing it, and inevitably some of the words and phrases are the same, but the bot is being far too sensitive. I checked two other false positives, Charles-Auguste Questel and Robinson (Paris RER), and they had even less in common with the source. The Robinson one is amusing: a very short article on a railway station matched to a very short web source on a helicopter company, with the one word "Robinson" in common.
So what I am advocating is to expand the scope of checks by CorenSearchBot to include edits to existing articles and to check more online sources, which will greatly increase the number of violations detected although many will still slip through. But in parallel review false positives like the ones given above and either remove logic that is creating them or add logic to weed out similar ones. E.g. "If the article and source have only one word in common, there is no violation."
As for the wording of the notice, the talk page message is probably o.k., although "and it appears to include a substantial copy of [url]" could perhaps be replaced by "and it appears to copy content from [url]". The banner placed on the article page is far too aggressive, particularly given the current level of inaccuracy of the bot. It should be more like a warning:
![]() | This article may include material copied directly from http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk:Moonriddengirl It is being reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues. The content should not be mirrored or otherwise reused until the issue has been resolved. |
Sorry for rambling on, but I do think there is a problem. We are so short of contributors... Aymatth2 ( talk) 14:38, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I like the new wording better, although the article banner is still very aggressive. The change I propose could in fact help the review process. If the bot checked significant changes (whatever that means) as well as new pages, but focussed on blatant copies where large chunks of text are almost exactly the same as the source, it would not just reduce the false positives but would also increase the number of serious violations caught, which are the ones most likely to cause trouble and also the ones most easily reviewed. The more subtle ones where a shorter amount of text is involved and there has been an attempt at paraphrasing are harder to review and less likely to cause problems. With limited resources, better to work on the obvious ones. Aymatth2 ( talk) 15:35, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
The template just has to link to a page that gives directions. The page can give a much more complete explanation than can reasonably be put into the template. I can't see any reason a bot should not review major contributions. Maybe it could piggyback on ClueBot, which checks all edits for vandalism anyway. ClueBot would pass selected pages or diffs over to CorenSearchBot to check for copyvios. CorenSearchBot would have to be made less sensitive to avoid flooding the review queue, or else should sort out reports into different headings: "Red", "Orange", "Yellow", "Gray" etc., which could be useful anyway. Aymatth2 ( talk) 18:21, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Maybe this should be cut-and-paste moved to a separate discussion page. There seem to be at least three separate threads:
They probably all need more time to resolve. Moonriddengirl, it is your talk page and your call. Aymatth2 ( talk) 00:40, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I will take a shot at breaking it out it tomorrow. I am really optimistic that a lot can be achieved, but it should be first discussed thoroughly to get consensus. Not a simple problem and we have to stay open minded, but I should make it clear that I am determined to get agreement on the Robinson rule: "If the article and source have only one word in common, there is no copyright violation.". Aymatth2 ( talk) 02:42, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I don't have much to say at the moment except that the shorter the template is the more likely it is to be read. MER-C 11:58, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I have a fair use picture question with File:Gilda-Radner.jpg's use in Saturday Night Live cast, in that I don't think it's use is not in compliance with WP:NFCC#10c nor do I think a fair use claim can be made - I have removed the picture twice now here and here but now it has been re-added for the third time thought I should check with you for what you think. Codf1977 ( talk) 18:17, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. I've sent an email to OTRS (commons) about http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maggie_Roswell.jpg and http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Maggie_Roswell_and_Hal_Rayle_2010.jpg. User:Bastique has checked the email and told me on IRC that everything looks good, but he is too busy to update the description pages of the images. Do you think you could take a look at the email (the title is "Images of Maggie Roswell")? This is the first time I've requested copyrighted content from someone so I want to make sure everything has been done correctly. Thanks, Theleftorium (talk) 17:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
New emails have been sent. Can you check? :) Theleftorium (talk) 07:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
I have sent you a message. Please read. AboundingHinata ( talk) 19:54, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
This AfD hasn't had any new votes for three days. Can it be closed now or do we have to wait the full 7 days of the re-listment period? Silver seren C 17:01, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I just want you to know that what you do is appreciated. Keep up the great work! Thank you, -- CrohnieGal Talk 23:08, 16 August 2010 (UTC) |
I notice you posted on the relevant ANI thread and as an experienced user I thought I'd ask you what you think it's best to do about the RfC/U I started on this user. My current plan is to leave it up for the normal 48 hours in case they make a very quick return. After that it will either be deleted if uncertified (if it isn't I'll ask for it to be) or very quickly archived. If the user comes back I can always ask for an undeletion or re-start the RfC/U. Does this seem fair and sensible to you? Dpmuk ( talk) 13:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm currently working through putting these articles back to the original titles which correspond to our naming policy regarding disambiguation and capitalisation, but admin tools are needed to move Goms District to Goms (district) - would you mind moving it if you get time? Many thanks! Knepflerle ( talk) 17:43, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Is it okay to upload photographs of an ancient tomb like these since the tomb is obviously in the public domain? Wikiposter0123 ( talk) 01:58, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello MRG, there's a troublesome one on my hand right now, mind taking a look here and here? Many thanks. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦№1185♪♫™ 17:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi again. You've checked my entry there for Róka Hasa Rádió as resolved but I think you misunderstood my posting to the noticeboard. There has never been a copyright infringement claim on the article page but instead I wanted to point out that this book club thingy is apparently making money with content from WP, not only that one article but they seem to offer loads of books. Of course they don't charge their customers for Wikipedia but for wrapping our GFDL and CC texts into nice booklets. I guess there's not a lot one can do about that but I thought the Foundation might be interested in it. And it might not even be the first such case. De728631 ( talk) 17:19, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Take a look at this "magician", seems like we have a lot of misguided peeps joining WP just to have their own autobiography but only to find themselves flounder in the very hole they've dug, by not being familiar with Wikipedia's editing guideline, policy and rule. Note also the number of image files in question. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦№1185♪♫™ 19:38, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
How do I put the Ed Fox page back up? I'm working on a second Taschen book and would like to have that all squared away.
Instead of deleting my page, why didn't you try to help me by fixing or adding to it? I don't want to have to go around in circles reading page after page only to be more confused, as Wiki rules seem to be (at least to me anyway)
I am owner/creator of edfox.com/footfactory.com and chromelady.com
Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.166.146.79 ( talk) 22:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl! Thanks for your prompt action in response to my copyvio notice. However, I suspect that I may have led you to block an innocent user. Looking through the article's history, the current copyvio occurred here and was perpetrated by an IP editor with a dynamic IP address (see preceding article history) the day after NeoNeo1087's last edits (10-11 Jan 2010). A checkuser may confirm that NeoNeo1087's contribs come from the same IP address block, but that's hardly conclusive. The most damning edit by Neo1087 is this one in which two paragraphs are copied, but with a citation to the source added. Please could you review the evidence and reconsider the block? Many thanks -- Timberframe ( talk) 13:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
OK, that seems like a good decision based on a more wide-ranging review than I'd made of the user's history. My conscience rest a little easier. Thanks :) -- Timberframe ( talk) 13:54, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure if this would automatically show up in your OTRS messages or not, so I thought I should let you know that I just merged some new emails into Ticket:2010072310041103 since they weren't automatically connected. VernoWhitney ( talk) 13:50, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Saw you had done some great work on this one. Re this edit, isn't the whole article a biography? In fact I was discussing this very issue on my talk page yesterday... – ukexpat ( talk) 18:45, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
So where is the other administrator input? The Wikipedia article has be around for about 3 years, and no other administrator has flagged it as a problem.
You editing is overly aggressive. There is no copyright infringement. There is very little public material on Joe Columbe. A lot of it is work of mouth. So information has to come mostly from one source. Copyright rule said that you have to change 30% of the original article. I have done that.
I will stop contributing to the Wikipedia fund until this over aggressive editing is reversed. WLee ( talk) 20:20, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl! Thank you for your contributions. I am a
bot notifying you on behalf of the
the unreferenced biographies team that 2 of the articles that you created are currently tagged as
Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The
biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure
verifiability, all biographies should be based on
reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current
813 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{
unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
Thanks!-- DASHBot ( talk) 03:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
Cookies! | |
Thanks a lot for fixing up problems of close paraphasing! Hekerui ( talk) 14:48, 19 August 2010 (UTC) has given you some cookies! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else some cookies, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{ subst:Cookies}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{ subst:munch}}! |
Hi Moonriddengirl, may I ask you for your opinion on this copyright matter? An IP started tinkering with a whole section, putting in spammy links and later there was an alleged claim that all the content had been copyrighted elsewhere. I'm at a loss as I can't verify the (c) claims and I'm tempted to restore the article. De728631 ( talk) 20:04, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
Okay, Daniel confirms that the action was taken in response to an e-mail (I've logged the ticket number at the talk page). I'm evaluating now to see the likelihood of actual infringement in the
material removed. Significant edits that added content found in the version removed include:
Oh, but the killing blow for us is here. It may not be true that every word was copied, but the content in that edit certainly is. There is older material, though, that can be restored, from this edit. Some of the content added later by other contributors may also be okay, but you'd have to be careful that it doesn't build on Doug Adams' writing, as incorporated wholesale. (I was leaning towards thinking this is a frivolous complaint; no longer. :/) -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:03, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
First I think I need to be part of the OTRS team otherwise I am going to be coming here a lot now. I was checking out some "in need of attention" and the first few I clicked on have been tagged for years with no number. I just dealt with some of them myself as they were fairly easy but having said that: File:Pledgemusicscreenshot.png is a screen grab of a web site. Normally a copyvio but could fall under Fair use. However in this case we have a notice that says an OTRS has been submitted and, supposedly, it says "Authorisation has been explicitly given by PledgeMusic for its use within Wikipedia" which, if that is the case, means it needs to be speedied. However the fact that it also states "Image is fair use as it is provided for commentary within wikipedia article" add a little twist on it. Just as an aside, as you may know the whole "for wikipedia use only" concept vs the "just slap a fur on it" idea has bothered me for a long time. I have been vocal about the fact the foundation set solid rules down about images marked as "for Wikipedia use only" must be "deleted on site" so I do not agree with the more common un-official add on "...unless an editor tags it with a FUR". This image is almost thought out that way, if you follow me. So I am not sure how to tag this one if, indeed, the OTRS says "Wikipedia use only".
Following that up with another OTRS in waiting image. File:Selenagrammy.jpg is an image of the late Selena backstage in the press room at the Grammy awards. What I am wondering about with this one is the statement "Photo taken at the 1994 Grammy Awards at Radio City Music Hall, New York on June 11, 1994, by the mother of user:AJon1992, who agrees to release it under the terms of the CC-BY-SA 3.0 license and the GFDL". As a photographer who has shot the Grammys before I know that access to the press area is very limited, they don't let fans hang out back there. Before anyone feels I am assuming bad faith I say this because User_talk:AJona1992 contains a discussion where the editor explains his mother and grandmother were Selena fans and his "grandmother used to live in Corpus Christi, Texas and began attending her concerts and taking pictures" and that between 1992, when the editor was born, and when Selena died in 1995 they watched TV, read news papers and "kept playing her songs while they clean, or on the radio." After moving to Florida the user says his grandmother and mother gave him "their collections (pictures, signatures, vhs tapes, etc)." So as with another recent OTRS case I suspect this image is not one taken by the mother, but by a member of the media, a print of which was obtained by the mother, clearly a huge fan, and became part of her Selena "collection".
Than we have File:Wash Post MSK2.jpg which was upped March 22, tagged the same day with {{di-no license}} and the uploader removed that tag and added an {{OTRS Pending}} tag the next day. Nothing has changed since.
How hard is it to get OTRS ability? Thanks Soundvisions1 ( talk) 16:27, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
← Just touching base to see if you uncovered anything about the image. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 16:27, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Raised at User talk:Piotrus. I know my motives are not the purest, due to our long-standing conflicts, so will try to compensate by working on other unrelated copyvio problems. Novickas ( talk) 21:37, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I could cry. This is a really important site, but I've now discovered that although I removed the new copyvio, this [5] edit 4 years ago, most of which is still in the article and makes up the bulk of the article, is from [6] and presumable added by Henshilwood who is one of the main people who has worked on the cave. I should remove it forthwith I guess? I'll try to rewrite it over the next few days. Dougweller ( talk) 18:19, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I have asked some questions on my talk page about what needs to be done, thank you! AJona1992 ( talk) 16:18, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
There is a user who in the past made a number of cut and past moves. I think this was due to ignorance not malignancy (I'm spending too much time on English Civil War articles as I am staring to use the patter!) His user name is LouisPhilippeCharles and I have just slapped him on the wrist because I came across one of his cut and past moves more than a month after he was told not to do it, which means he has not cleaned up after himself. His posting to my talk page shows that his English is not the best, and his edit history shows that he is using the move tab now.
What I wanted to know is is do you know of a tool that I can use to see where he has made these cut an past moves by listing of his edits with edit sizes (large deletes followed by large inserts should be fairly easy to see). Just article creations will not be enough because he is an active editor (and may well have been creating articles) and many such cut an past moves are likely to be onto redirects. Thinking about it he probably needs to be informed about copying stuff from the French Wikipeda into the English Wikipedia as well...-- PBS ( talk) 00:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
I have now completed the task I set myself see User talk:LouisPhilippeCharles#Warning: Do not make cut and past moves and by looking at the last page of the took I was able to pick on some obvious ones. A list of some previous violations were also produced by another editor which I looked through. They clearly show bad faith by LouisPhilippeCharles. Most of them had already been corrected, but the last one I looked at is troubling because it shows that this problem goes much further back and involves the use of an older account used by the same editor. Since this issue of cut and past copying has been raised several times by different editors with LouisPhilippeCharles, and to date he has not stopped, or volunteer to clean up his mess, I think he may need to be formally investigated. When you have time please take a look at Talk:Marie Louise of Orléans (1662–1689)#The history of this article. to see what troubles me. I will leave it to your better judgement to decide if this editor needs to be investigated further as it could be argued that by putting a note on his edits that he has copied the text from another page that no internal copyright violation has taken place, even though due to subsequent page moves it is often difficult to piece the article histories back together. -- PBS ( talk) 01:11, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
I fixed some obvious ones by going to the bottom of the generated list and looking for large deletes (14 of them as listed on his talk page). But I suspect I have not found all of them. Also I did not look at the user name User:Tbharding. I have just run the tool on User:Tbharding. The first two in the list look OK (one was probably a cut and past move but it was fixed at the time -- I did not look at it closely as it had been fixed so it may have been kosher) but the third entry is the result of a cut and past move [7] that has not been fixed. The history of the article is now split over two articles Princess Louise Élisabeth of France (since a cut and past move) and Louise Élisabeth of France, so as that was only the third in the list there is probably a lot more mess to be cleaned up (under both user names). :-(
Therefore I would suggest that a formal investigation is opened because since I started looking at this users peccadillos he has not offered to helped in any way to clear up his mess. -- PBS ( talk) 07:44, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hey, MRG. On this US Army webpage there is a copyright stamp on the bottom. Normally/Often, Department of Defense and US Military webpages are public domain, but it appears the DoD also hosts webpages which are copyrighted. ( This disclaimer stating United States Department of Defense does not exercise any editorial control over the information seems to confirm that it is not part of their public domain material.) Also, this notice on the Army website indicates that they do use copyrighted material on their pages -- but will provide specific copyright notices when it is. Would that be your understanding, too? — CactusWriter (talk) 22:14, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Almost missed this! It wouldn't be the first time that a government source had tried to impose copyright over pd content, though I think it might be the first time I would ever have seen a US federal source do so. Verno makes sense; in the absence of a specific non-governmental source, they are not complying with their own disclaimer. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:06, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Hallo Moonriddengirl, to end the copyright problems I made a translation from the Dutch Wikipedia. Best regards, Sir Statler ( talk) 22:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
This is a much better solution. I'm glad the problems are solved. Sir Statler ( talk) 22:35, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello MRG, there is this particular editor ( Scania N113 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)) who has been blocked several times for his WP:Tendentious editing behaviour on the article page of Airbus 340 and just today his attempt again at insulting people here as well as here ( another one was added after I deleted it, note also that the definition of "無恥" is "despicable" in Chinese language). Please note that his block just ended about 3 weeks back and quite frankly, I'm all for WP:RBI when dealing with such editor who just don't get it. Thoughts? -- Dave ♠♣♥♦№1185♪♫™ 06:05, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello Desk, per his earlier edits №1, №2, №3, №4, №5, №6, №7, №8, together with his latest edit today, should I report him to ANI or WQA? Note also that he has yet to apologise to us for his previous misdemeanor. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦№1185♪♫™ 12:04, 20 August 2010 (UTC)
May I know the reason behind the deletion of Topic Bhutani, if possible.
Regards, Gaurav —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.160.157.4 ( talk) 11:51, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Since the discussion about the Gearslutz source and its use has been archived and at an impasse, how should this matter be approached now? Dan56 ( talk) 11:52, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there...I wonder if you can advise me a bit about a copyright issue; I was concerned about copyright troubles by an editor, so I looked at all the things they'd created and compiled a list [8] - however, I didn't want to be 'bitey' so I just asked them about a couple of specific ones, and also fixed what I could. The user did add attribution on a couple of the copypasted articles.
Yesterday I asked about Doodle4Google on User talk:Mono#Doodle4Google copyright violations, and they did indeed edit it (and wrote fixed) but I don't really think that their edit constitutes appropriate paraphrasing. I've been trying to 'gently' ask them to look at their contribs and fix things. I wonder if you can help at all; I'd be very grateful. Best, Chzz ► 22:44, 16 August 2010 (UTC)
I am not a regular contributor to Wikipedia, but have been using it extensively for information search for my own purposes and make small corrections once in a while. I have particular interest in Bengal history and culture related articles and have been keen watching developments in that area for a long time. Recently I saw that you have marked Annette Akroyd for possible copyright infringement. The author of the article is no more active on Wikipedia and I don’t think that anybody else is going to do anything about it. Hang it with dignity. Delete the article.
I have been observing there are two sets of extreme administrators – one goes round placing Original Research tags and the other goes around searching for copyvio. The ordinary contributor is lost in between but the wily propagandists misusing Wikipedia to their heart’s content gets around merrily. See what happened to Bhurshut. You marked it copyvio and the editor (name changed) has quickly posted all the material on a new page Bhurshut Rajya. You probably don’t even have the time to do all the chasing. And what about the content? It is mostly bogus content, so badly written that few would be attracted to go through it. Is this article really fit for Wikipedia? And what about the numerous edits this fellow makes on other pages to propagate his point of view? Who reins him in? No administrator bothers.
Take another case. User:Ronosen and some his sock-puppets have been blocked but he goes on creating new sock puppets and works on Wikipedia at ease. He has an article titled Adi Dharm. It is a bogus article, developed and maintained by Ronosen, his sock-puppets or anonymous contributors (mostly he himself). You have access to David Koff’s book. Does he talk about Adi Dharm? You check Shivanath Shastri. There is not a word about it. But Wikipedia merrily hosts one and the intelligent and hard-working administrators are helpless in the face of active propagandists. And you take great pride in chasing out the ordinary contributor who copies a few sentences unwittingly from some book or website. Great work!
- Ratan Siddiqui ( talk) 07:01, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Um excuse me? but when do you plan on bringing back those RS to this article? AJona1992 ( talk) 18:19, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi,
I've been fixing the vandalism from Surajcap ( talk · contribs) and his various 117.* ip addresses for quite some time now. His edit patterns are obvious: he copies a large chunk of text from blogs or google books, and then formats that in wikipedia markup, and then copy-pastes in multiple articles. I can't identify the source of some of his edits on Pratapadiya and other pages, but these are very likely to be copyvios as well (large amount of text added by this user).
I have blocked some socks of Surajcap and some IP addresses, but later found it easier to pending-charge-protect the articles instead. He uses a dial-up isp from India, and switches ips every day. So, blocking the IPs will perhaps affect a large section of Indian editors. -- Ragib ( talk) 23:09, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
G'day MRG - I picked this up from WP:CP and reverted it to the safe version. Would this be a case for revdel? I was hesitant given the sheer number of intermediate edits and the fact that the copyvio was "presumed" as opposed to "blatant". -- Mkativerata ( talk) 18:28, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I noticed that you had tagged Dhaka City Corporation as a copyvio, and the article subsequently got deleted. Unfortunately, the source you found (Encyclopedia of India Pakistan and Bangladesh) is actually a well known copyvio of Wikipedia itself. (see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_70#Circular_references:_Gyan_Publishing_and_ISHA_Books).
Since a lot of non-copyvio articles are at risk of being marked as copyvios, I urge you to go back into your contribution log, and undo any articles that you thought to be copyvio of this "encyclopedia". -- Ragib ( talk) 18:36, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, could you be more specific as to why you deleted the Greater Hartford section from the University of Connecticut article? If copyright is a concern please note that the article was written by the same person who wrote the UConn website listing, hence the similarity. I look forward to your response. Sem04014 ( talk) 14:23, 23 August 2010 (UTC).
Hi Moonriddengirl! I have noticed that text was same as on regularly mirrors Wikipedia content after I left message on Coren's page. So, if you can fix this article, that would be great! Regarding some of my past edits, I have copied content in similar fashion before. Usually I have copied myself, for making stubs for some GA articles. For example: I have made stub-article Pontius de Cruce in order to have less red links in GA article Klis Fortress. Any suggestions? Regards, Kebeta ( talk) 14:55, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Shan't be able to help much in the next couple weeks. (The Banglapedia CCI is what I'd most like to work on, but if that's done soon, clearly others will remain or crop up.) The Old Gray Mare still reads and writes Gray Lady-style content pretty well but balks when asked to do more than that. Now she even has problems reading email. So time for a new computer and/or new connection, but installing and transferring will take a while. For when that's done - a couple questions. Any updates on the WP-specific plag-checker tool that got some research attention a while ago? How does a CCI work right now - do you-all, after deciding it's needed, manually copy-paste an individual's contributions, sentence by sentence, into Google? Do you have any recommendations for free tools that check an entire WP article against Google, including Books and Scholar? (if specifying these might be seen as overly promotional, you or a talk page stalker could send me an email, which I'd be able to read eventually). Thanks, Novickas ( talk) 15:19, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
Extended content
|
---|
Regarding this: since the edit in question is by Piotrus, I have to voice my concern here. If you're looking for a neutral third party, Shabazz really isn't one. He's basically Piotrus' ally, having filed Piotrus' appeal and proxying for him in Eastern European articles while Piotrus is topic banned. It would be interesting to know who exactly recommended Shabazz as a neutral party in this issue. Please, try to find someone else if at all possible. Offliner ( talk) 12:44, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd be of no use to you because I don't understand Polish. —
Malik Shabazz
Talk/
Stalk
17:20, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
|
I have looked into the copyright issue – using my excessive language skills – and find no similarity in the texts, apart from what necessarily follows from the use of a single source. As for the issue of neutrality, I am sure Offliner will not object to me looking at the issue. -- Petri Krohn ( talk) 18:50, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
I do not know what problems you are having with Google Translate. This is what I get. No gibberish, and besides, I do not think that Polish is yet a Scandinavian language! -- Petri Krohn ( talk) 17:02, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there! I'm wondering if I could have your advice on something. Ziggyseventh ( talk · contribs) put an FAC banner on the talk page of Katy Perry, but nobody has actually initiated the nomination yet. It's a GA, but hasn't had a peer review yet (not that that's necessary, but still) and I believe that FAC is something that should be discussed before it's begun. And in this particular case, this musician is about to release a new album, so I think that any FAC should wait at least a month after the album's release so that it can be detailed appropriately at the artist's article. Ziggyseventh is rather new to Wikipedia, and attempted to start an FAR and a peer review for Lady Gaga simultaneously a few months ago. When that happened, the FAR banner was just removed but the peer review did happen. Presently, I was going to just remove the FAC banner and then leave a message at the user's talkpage. Do you think that would that be alright? Cliff smith talk 16:16, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
When I was doing project tagging, I found Talk:Middle-range theory (archaeology)#Plagiarism?. Nobody has significantly changed the article since this concern was raised. If this is a copyvio, I may be able to help at least stub it. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:37, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
I hope I did that right: Talk:Star League. By the way, do we have a template for attribution to non-editors? There is an article that I wrote using content written by certain scholars who wanted to help expand the article, but couldn't or did not want to edit Wikipedia directly, so they just emailed me stuff "for Wikipedia". I have emailed the lead coordinator in this project to get names and confirm free license permission; when I get it what should I do, beyond forwarding the email to OTRS? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 01:44, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi there,
I created the page donal o'connor which you deleted. I know the information is similar to what is on www.myspace.com/donaloconnorfiddle I created this page also.
Can you let me know how we go about undeleting this page?
Kind Regards
Donal O'Connor docfiddle@hotmail.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.4.33.188 ( talk) 13:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Why did you delete the rewritten post which had no copyright problem? Elsewhere you said you have no issues if the article was rewritten and so was it done to avoid any possible copyright violation. Till you deleted it and so requested to restore the latest rewritten version ignoring any personal issues which you seem to have regarding this article! 117.254.79.182 ( talk) 07:48, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
At Pedo Basantapur the reduced circumstances of this ancient royal family aroused sympathy of the Rajas of Burdwan, now their relatives who gave rent free estates to them at Bansberia (near Kolkata) and several places in Burdwan and Nadia districts. However, after Kiritchandra’s death in 1740 the Burdwan Zamindari confiscated parts of these lands to west of River Ganga mainly that of Narendra Narayan Ray of Basantapur the father of Bharatchandra Ray, ‘Raygunakar’, 18th century Bengali poet, who fled to his estate in Nadia under Raja Krishnachandra of Krishnanagar. [1]
At Pedo Basantapur the reduced circumstances of this ancient royal family of Bhurshut aroused sympathy of the Rajas of Burdwan, now their relatives who gave rent free estates to them at Bansberia (near Kolkata) and several places of Burdwan and Nadia districts. However, after Kiritchandra’s death in 1740 the Burdwan Zamindari confiscated parts of these lands to west of River Ganga mainly of Narendra Narayuan Ray of Basantapur the father of Bharatchandra Ray, ‘Raygunakar’, 18th century Bengali poet, who went to his estate in Nadia under Raja Krishnachandra of Krishnanagar. [1]
For the disrupting bit on my school IP. Hinata talk 16:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I'd like to see a template like the current copy/paste template but not suggesting copyvio but saying that a substantial part of the article has been copied from ... and advising what should be done, eg rewrite prose, try to find more current sources, etc. I recently spent some time at Kohen Gadol removing material I'd found in a book, only to then discover that the book was composed of material from the Jewish Encyclopedia. I don't think the small template at the bottom of articles is sufficient - it's tiny and gives no guidance to editors, and I think that any article largely based on such old sources needs the standard type of template we give to other articles with various problems and that I can automatically tag. What do you think? Dougweller ( talk) 16:55, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I wonder if you might give your opinion on an argument regarding fair use of cited material being made here/ here, or at least let me know if my rebuttal is sound. – xeno talk 17:39, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Please unblock me- Ramesh vyas —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.94.133.1 ( talk) 19:05, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi, regarding our discussion yesterday on image authorisations of Derek Ridgers and Danny Flynn, you asked me to leave any further message for you here:
Well, I've received a forwarded email from Mr Flynn saying that he's replied to the Wikipedia email - (ref: [Ticket#2010052710028115]) - confirming his authorisation of the images. BUT I noticed in the Wiki email sent in to him order to confirm identity, you/Wikipedia were also emailing Mr Flynn through www.dannyflynn.com - but that is a DIFFERENT Danny Flynn! That is the website of an illustrator of the same name (he also has a Wikipedia entry), so no wonder you received no reply. It seems that Mr Flynn (our Mr Flynn, the printer) did not notice that part of your email to him. So I've asked him to reply to that email as well, pointing out that error. There must be some other way to confirm identity... -- Affable Familiar ( talk) Affable Familiar ( talk) 23:14, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
Can you run a check on the image in this IFD? File:MichaelErnestLewis.jpg. There is an OTRS number for other images upped by the same editor that are of the same subject that were provided by the mother of the subject. Perhaps it was left off this image? OTRS Ticket Number check. Thanks - and guess I will be around her more again with these types of things. :) Soundvisions1 ( talk) 15:41, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, Thank you so much for reviewing the Lighthouse of Houston site I put together. I actually posted this entry with the permission of the Lighthouse of Houston President. We respectfully request that you please reactivate the Lighthouse of Houston Wikipedia entry. Lighthouse supporters would very much like to have a presence on Wikipedia, as I know so many other Lighthouse sites in the US can be found on here. I would be more than happy to put you directly in touch with the Lighthouse of Houston President. Can you please advise me on the best way to move forward? Again, thank you! I am watchlisting this post and look forward to your response. DoubleDimond DoubleDimond ( talk) 16:01, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you so much! I think we will start with an email from the President (with the recommended language) to the above address. If it is OK, as suggested above, I will let you know when I send it. Thank you again!!!! DoubleDimond ( talk) 19:14, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi...one more quick question. I am helping the Lighthouse fill out the form to submit and just would like to please know the URL that I should submit to them. I'm assuming I submit the URL to the page you removed? If so, can you please provide me with this? I cannot find it anywhere now. Thank you! DoubleDimond ( talk) 19:32, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Great! We will include that! Thanks! DoubleDimond ( talk) 19:37, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
Hi again! I just wanted to let you know that the Lighthouse of Houston President Gibson M. DuTerroil just sent the e-mail to the Wikipedia permissions address. I know you said you would be kind of enough to be on the lookout for it if I told you when he sent it. In addition, he included the link to their logo as there was a copyright statement on that as well. Is there anyway you could resolve both of these issues, or is it best for me to take another route regarding the logo? Thank you so much again for everything!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by DoubleDimond ( talk • contribs) 17:25, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Yes, he forwarded the e-mail to me, and I definitely will respect the real name issue and your privacy. He did send a new e-mail that will hopefully solve the remaining issue. You should have it now if you get a chance to look, and please let me know if you did not receive it. I do truly appreciate your responsiveness and help with this!! DoubleDimond ( talk) 19:24, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
Thank you!!!! I will look for it now! I really appreciate all your assistance and guidance in how to work through the process! DoubleDimond ( talk) 15:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)