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 25 | ← | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | → | Archive 35 |
Hi Moonriddengirl, if you have time, would you mind looking at the above? Lilian Govey is a one-paragraph article, with all but one sentence paraphrased from Richard Dalby's The Golden Age of Children's Book Illustration (1991). Not sure whether it's close enough to count as a copyvio; or whether the words would be considered ordinary enough so that a degree of similarity was inevitable. The editor was not pleased by recent similar inquiries, so I thought I ought to check it with you, and ask what the procedure is (re: tagging, removing, deleting).
Dalby: "She illustrated several books for Harrap, Wells Gardner & Darton (under the pseudonym 'JL Gilmour', following a disagreement with this company), Dean (Dean's Happy Common Series; The Book of Happy Gnomes), Nelson (The Old Fairy Tales), and especially Humphrey Milford (The Rose Fairy Book; Nursery Rhymes from Animal Lands) who also employed her talents in several playbooks, Christmas annuals, and the 'Postcards for the Little Ones' Series."
"She spent most of her adult life in a remote Sussex cottage, where she where she became devoted to the study of local history, folk lore and spiritualism."
Wikipedia: "She illustrated for the publishers Harrap, Wells Gardner & Dean (using the pseudonym J.L. Gilmour), Dean, Nelson, and Humphrey Milford. Books include Dean's Happy Christmas Series, The Book of Happy Gnomes, The Old Fairy Tales, The Rose Fairy Book, and Nursery Rhymes from Animal Lands. For Humphrey Milford she illustrated several playbooks, Christmas annuals, and the Postcards for the Little Ones series. Govey passed most of her adult life in a remote Sussex cottage studying folklore, spiritualism, and local history."
Margaret Tarrant has two such paragraphs. The sources are this article by Denise Ortakales, and Richard Dalby's The Golden Age of Children's Book Illustration.
Dalby, p. 134: Besides her many children's books, Margaret Tarrant's postcards, calendars and silhouette designs were enormously popular. The plates in her edition of Nursery Rhymes (1914) were reissued as 48 bestselling postcards. Reproductions of her best-known painting, 'The Piper of Dreams', sold by the thousand to decorate sitting-rooms around the land. Her religious paintings achieved a great following in the 1920s and 1930s, especially 'He Prayeth Best', depicting a shepherd boy kneeling on a hilltop.
Wikipedia, citing Dalby: Besides her children's books, Tarrant's postcards, calendars, and silhouettes were extremely popular. Reproductions of The Piper of Dreams sold in the thousands, and the 48 plates from her best-selling Nursery Rhymes of 1914 were issued as sets of postcards. Her religious paintings of the 1920s and 1930s were extremely popular, especially He Prayeth Best, a depiction of a praying shepherd boy.
Ortakales: She has exhibited at the Royal Academy and the Royal Society of Artists in Birmingham. By 1953, her health and eyesight was deteriorating. Within a few years, she gave up her house in Peaslake to live with her friend Molly Brett in Cornwall. She died on 28 July 1959. She left her pictures to her friends and her estate to twelve charities.
Wikipedia, citing Dalby and Ortakales: She exhibited at the Royal Academy and the Royal Society of Artists in Birmingham. In the early 1950s, her health and eyesight deteriorated, and, within a few years, she left her house in Peaslake to join her friend Molly Brett in Cornwall. She died on 28 July 1959, leaving her pictures to friends and her estate to twelve charities.
SlimVirgin talk| contribs 21:44, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
( edit conflict) You may wish to pay attention to the edits from Susanne2009NYC ( talk · contribs); not only does this fit in with same plagiaristic pattern, I have suspicion to believe that this is a returned sock of a banned user. I am going to investigate into this, likely with CU. – MuZemike 22:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
I would appreciate your advice on a copyright issue. About a week ago User:Fram started summarily deleting subpages from under User:Geo Swan. One of those subpages was User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Brookings lists of released captives -- speedy deleted as a copyright violation.
I initiated a deletion review Wikipedia:DRV#User:Geo_Swan/Guantanamo/Brookings lists of released captives. It was closed early by an administrator who chose not to take a stand on whether it was a copyright violation. That admin emailed me a tiny rump of the of the original page -- entirely worthless. I left a message on their talk page not long afterwards, with what I intended to be some good faith questions about where to get the copyright issue resolved. But they haven't been online in almost a week, and haven't responded. I have however subsequently been emailed the full source.
I'd be very grateful if you would look at the deleted page.
I have done a lot of work on the Guantanamo captives habeas corpus cases -- probably hundreds of hours. This page, or a version of it, would be very useful to me as an aid to correlating which captives were included in which habeas corpus petitions. I have doubts over whether the original deleting administrator's action was firmly based in policy. But, if, for the sake of argument it was. A stripped down version of the page, that still allowed me to correlate the habeas petitions with the captives, would remain extremely useful to me.
Thanks for your help Geo Swan ( talk) 22:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I'm looking to find out if Wikipedia has any images of paintings by Jacob Lawrence or other African American painters for an article I'm rewriting. Don't remember what I did with that search link you gave me a while back. Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 00:00, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I thought I was doing the right thing but apparently it was "too close paraphrasing". I looked at the case page (or whatever it is) and didn't understand it. It looks all too complicated for me. I'm willing to cooperate but I don't know what you want me to do. It's impossible for me to go back and clean this stuff up. Just blank the pages. Susanne2009NYC ( talk) 00:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi again MRG, if you have time (and there's no rush), I was wondering if I could ask you about using the Internet Archive when checking for copyvios.
I tagged Wanda Gág as a copyvio today because several paragraphs are identical to this webpage, which seems no longer to be online, but which I found on the Internet Archive.
I want to be certain that it was Wikipedia copying the website and not the other way round. The material was added to Wikipedia in November 2006 in this edit. So far as I can tell that material has been on the website since before November 2006. There is an Internet Archive log of the website's pages here, and if you go into, say, the March 2004 version, you can click through to a list of illustrators here (which has the year 2004 in its URL), and from there to the page our article seems to copy from.
I have one small concern, and that is that the actual webpage for Wanda Gág does not have its own URL. That is, to get to (what I assume is) the March 2004 version, I have to click on the list of illustratrators for that month, and then click on Wanda Gág, but the URL doesn't change. So I'm not sure how I can be 100 percent certain that some of the Gág material is not from a later date. I'm wondering if there's a way to nail it down, i.e. to date that particular webpage.
I hope I'm not being an idiot and missing something obvious. :) SlimVirgin talk| contribs 15:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Too often great editors like you are overlooked and not given the credit deserved for all their great contributions. So I am awarding you this barnstar to let you know I greatly appreciate all you do for Wikipedia, and please keep up the outstanding work!! CTJF83 chat 03:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC) |
MRG, I just tagged File:Anushka Shetty.jpg as F9, but notice that you'd done some deletions but retained this version, so can you check before it's deleted? cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 20:42, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Also, could you take a look at East Indians, was tagged as copyvio a while back, and then I went on wikation and someone removed the tag. I don't see an OTRS note and the site doesn't seem to have a release note either, the article history has the tags etc. It popped up on my watchlist now and I remembered! cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 21:19, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I had asked Iridescent to look over an article that I had worked on some time ago Edward M. Cotter (fireboat) for copyright/plagerism problems and she suggested I contact you. I want to be sure that I'm not holding too close to my sources and if changes should be made. I realize that you're busy but if you could look at the SS Canadiana article for similar problems. I have also printed and read the pdf about plagiarism and it is helpful. Thanks Shinerunner (talk) 22:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I see that there has been some activity today on the Sassy Pandez page, and some additional references have been added as a result. You may remember that when we first can discussing this page a couple of years we requested that my clients full name was removed from the page for personal safety reasons, but the new references that have been added today include this name, which again raises a very real personal safety issue. Please can we discuss this further, ideally on my Talk page. Thanks. AquilaUK ( talk) 23:31, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Awesomeness | ||
Please accept a belated (but very sincere) "Thank You" for the time and effort you put into writing those two Copyright articles for The Bugle. I believe I've also managed to find an award you haven't actually got yet. EyeSerene talk 13:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC) |
Incidentally, this barnstar was hand-drawn by a University of British Columbia student during the FA-Team's first mission... and is unofficially the coolest (and officially the least tasteful) barnstar on the 'pedia. Enjoy :) EyeSerene talk 13:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
|
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Presented with many thanks for your hard work in explaining and fixing copyright violations, for raising awareness of the pitfalls, and for helping to keep Wikipedians on the side of the angels. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 13:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC) |
IN RE: Copyright Talk Page
I wasn't sure where/how to continue. If I am posting in the wrong area, please move it back or whatever is proper.
So, I found the license you spoke of and added it to my wiki. It is located in the footer and the link sends you here. I believe this is kinda what you were driving at. I will need to go into each file I've imported and write a note in the Summary and that will take a bit of time, but I want to make sure I am on track. It's never been so much about the legalese and such, more of a belief that there is right and wrong in the world; the military drove that in my head! :) I want to make sure I get stuff right and acceptable to folks both on Wikipedia and at large as I hope to set an example with others who visit to my site; to show that there is a proper way to use other folks' materials. Thanx! -- Foreclosurepedia ( talk) 00:58, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Almost a week ago a message appeared on my talk page regarding possible copy violations with the Wikipedia article on Jenny Morris (musician), I indicated to User:124.176.58.238 that the article's talk page was a more appropriate venue for the discussion. I transferred the material there and also posted the concerns, as I understood them, at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 November 11 but have received no response. Since that time, User:124.176.58.238 has repeatedly deleted a segment of the article (and sources) which has been reverted by myself and by two other editors. Subsequent edits by User:124.176.58.238 have added the claim that the information is "taken from my bio". I believe this is information which is independently verifiable and that no copy violation has occurred. shaidar cuebiyar ( talk) 05:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
It has been sometime since we last talked. I noticed that you closed Eastern chipmunk because of suspected copyright violations. Frankly, I think your action was overkill. I tried to find the sentence you gave as an example but could not find it anywhere in the article. I also noticed that many reputable editors have been contributing to the article and now their efforts have been lost. Can you clarify what parts of the article are violations? It is not obvious in such a long and well edited article. This is a rather important article since it is a well known, well loved, and common animal. It should not be blanked out for long. Cheers. DGERobertson 01:55, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. Could you have a quick look at this fair use rational being claimed for the infobox of a living person, seems a bit weak to me, I have nominated it at files for deletion here - seems like a very weak excuse for fair use to me .. thoughts? No hurry, no worry. Off2riorob ( talk) 12:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
h r u?
no msgs since long?
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Rajesh_Khanna&oldid=397498516
this contains some added info and corrections. do guard it ..i mean u may check it and ensure if at all some idiots make wrong chnages u will revert to my version .. Shrik88music ( talk) 09:41, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl. I'm in contact with the people who sent the message with the permission. May I ask you what's missing there? Is it the correct license? I'd like to let them know, as they're quite confused (they know very little about copyright policy of Wikipedia, and my explanation (I wrote them an e-mail) was perhaps unclear.) Thanks for any hints. Kind regards. -- Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 13:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I have made a few posts on my talk but have not received any feedback from Administrators so I'm communicating directly with you as you helped me previously. I now have three letters of authorisation to use pictures on the 44 Parachute Brigade (South Africa) article and would like to know how I can proceed from here. Can you please reply and give me guidance?
kind regards
--Smikect 16:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smikect ( talk • contribs)
By the way thank you for realizing the mistakes on those articles and I am sorry for any trouble I might have caused. − Jhenderson 777 21:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Cookies! | ||
For you! 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}}! |
MRG, I'm going through Indian actor cats to eliminate copyvio images (finished Category:Tamil actors so far), and I came across this image. I have no reason to not believe that the editor who uploaded this is the painter, but his website seems to be selling this image through a third party site with a certain copyright policy. I don't see an OTRS ticket either. The editor is not active currently, so I'm not sure leaving a talk page message would help. What should be done here? cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 17:31, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Check this edit and see if it is true. I was going to rollback but the user seems to been a long term user. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 18:31, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=TWINS&curid=29650154&diff=397739134&oldid=397735144. I had thought my edit summary was adequate. -- W☯W t/ c 20:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
the reason i put it was to indicate that semi protection is needed....to notify it i have even given a written statement Shrik88music ( talk) 14:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC) thanks for what u did now .. this is the same thing i had asked for....there are very few people like u , hebrides and e ripley who edit articles fruitfully other wise there are some who just dont want to contribute fruitfully Shrik88music ( talk) 14:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
MRG, this is going to be one awfully big CCI.
I'm going to be traveling Thursday, preparing tomorrow, but I've started:
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey Moonriddengirl, I just wanted to let you know that Ottava put up a source review of the one FA that Kathyrine contributed to, To Autumn, here. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 19:38, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I don't know where to report this since the ILT stuff is all over the place now, but you may know how to deal with this. I found this image File:Old Mr. Prickly Pin.JPG which was uploaded by Susanne2009NYC and by now has been moved to commons, even though it shouldn't have been since none of Potter's illustrations are PD in the UK. She has several more uploaded pics at commons too: [2] Siawase ( talk) 22:41, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Also Confirmed is SoniaSyle ( talk · contribs); those contribs need to likewise be scrutinized as with the others. One of the articles she worked on, Cry (Michael Jackson song), is a GA. – MuZemike 21:58, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I don't know how to update the CCI, but so far have identified close paraphrasing or direct quotations on each of the articles I've looked at. Three are almost completely scrubbed: The Story of Miss Moppet, The Tale of Mr. Jeremy Fisher and The Tale of Peter Rabbit. Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 03:06, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
I notice you did some work removing copyvios from this terribly written article, and archived part of the talk page. I had already archived it and it looks like you might have archived my archive (nested archives??) but that's not what I'm here about. On the archive that I created, I left in a section that was a blatant copyvio so I could review it and possibly rewrite it, but I never got around to it. And I shouldn't have left it in the first place. I've removed the "introductory text" bit from the archive page, but you may want to go further and remove it from the page history, which I can't do. Ivanvector ( talk) 17:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
The text you are TAGGING as copyvio has been altered thus complying with the set of Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA 3.0 policy. Yes, the article was once tagged as copyvio although it has now been altered or changed. You may just be saying that a article may be deleted if it had any copyvio a year ago. It is in the history but you must understand it has been changed! Thank you. Jaime 070996 20:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
I just noticed your post here, and saw the backwards copy vio template at the top of the page. Of course it's a great idea to tag articles in that way, but I wonder if it would be even more useful if instead of (or as well as) posting your comments to the talk page, as you did, the template could be altered to have a "show/hide" section in which your comments could be pasted. That way a future editor who comes across the apparently copyvioed text would be able to see the results of your work and not have to wonder whether you made a mistake. Do you think this would be useful? Mike Christie (talk) 13:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
hello i have been observing the comments posted in shrik88music talk page . thier some of the users kept on telling him that wiki wants exactly the same things as written in the source.i would hve modified like how shrik has been doing. now its getting absolutely confusing as to what is needed. why a double stance is being taken . there is bound to be copyright issue if directly scenetnce is copied so why not modify the words?
as far as links are concerned they are authentic and info needs to be added . why dont you help in incorporating the info i had copy pasted? Quicklight ( talk) 17:24, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
do see the rajesh khanna talk page. Quicklight ( talk) 17:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
i will wait for a day and see whether the so called editors who opposed are genuinely interested in contributing to the article. i would modify the words and sentences and ensure the info i had pasted comes in separate para. can u recommend me some like minded individuals..who can help in modifying the sentences. info was vital to make all wiki readers of future to understand that he formed "popular on screen" or hit pairs with those 7 actresses in particular. Quicklight ( talk) 18:04, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Do you, or any of your lurkers, have Gale Literature Resource Center accounts? I haven't, so I'm unable to check whether this is a copyright violation of the sources cited. I've cleaned up the article to make it easier to check. Uncle G ( talk) 15:21, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello MRG. I was wandering if you could help me. If you look at
List of 90210 episodes you'll see in the section for the third season it include information from the lead of the season 3 article. Even though, the "only include" things are used. Season 1 and 2 sections only include the episodes like they're supposed to. Any ideas on what caused it? Thank you.
Jayy008 (
talk) 18:46, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
My bad, ignore me! Jayy008 ( talk) 18:48, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
With regard to the Ropbert Garside kerfuffle, it's worth you contacting Panyd ( talk · contribs), who was handling a closely related OTRS ticket. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry ( talk) 19:10, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, sorry to bother you with this, but if you have a minute, could you take a look at Talk:Rajesh Khanna and comment on the text I've suggested there, in the section Talk:Rajesh_Khanna#whats_the_issue? I'm a little worried about the words "popular on-screen pairs" which is the same wording as in this source; there may be a better way of phrasing it so we can avoid it altogether, but perhaps a three-word noun phrase wouldn't constitute a copyright problem? After all, there is a limited number of ways you can express the concept, and I imagine that if "popular on-screen pairs" is a copyright problem, then e.g. "popular pairs on the screen" would also be problematic. Quoting the source verbatim might conceivably work, of course, but there are already quite a lot of direct citations in the article. (I think I may have spent too much time reading about this, today, and my brain is shutting down. There are probably ten obvious rephrasings that would remove the problem altogether :-) ) Anyway, I'd appreciate it tremendously if you could weigh in on this particular issue. -- bonadea contributions talk 19:07, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
i dont think its a big copyright issue --- fact can be represented only in this manner ir. he formed onscreen hit pairs with.... Quicklight ( talk) 17:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
from the above discussion its clear that there is no copyright issue as far as the sentence "He formed popular onscreen pairs with with Sharmila Tagore, Asha Parekh, Mumtaz in the seventies and with Hema Malini, Tina Munim, Shabana Azmi, Smita Patil and Poonam Dhillon in eighties in many romances and social melodramas and films from a range of different genres." - so can i paste this ???? if any1 reverts it foolishly you can talk to them Quicklight ( talk) 17:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, In 2007 Mr. Garside got his world record which is WHY this person became an editor in 2007. They drove this article into an edit war because they are an opponent of Mr. Garside. They have, on and off, been edit warring with Mr. Garside for years under different names. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 11:52, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
For one, Mr. Garside has the world record and here, the weighting is wrong. We have been into this before with Wikipedia UK (legal) and I will not revisit the same discussion as was discussed in 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:06, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Plus, no one is talking about locking articles, but why all the changes? Nothing has happened to this story to warrant changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:08, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
No tangible reason to change the article as it stood on 19th November has been asserted. Therefore one assumes that the edit that is negative towards Mr. Garside has been conducted by the same detractors who did this in 2007 and 2009. We cannot allow this kind of harrassment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:12, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Oh I see, YOU own the article do you? Negative and unwarranted edits are not acceptable. We have been through this before, for years. What was wrong with the article as it stood on 19th November 2010? Do explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:15, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, I really do not want to get into a dispute with you over this, but frankly, no changes to this article are warranted. Can you explain why this article needs to be changed at all? Please note that on 19th November, just 3 days ago, the article was fine and since then aggressive changes took place, that we do not agree with. We know who is doing it and we intend to protect the reputation of this living person, Robert Garside. Wikipedia has a policy on living person and with regards to the article itself, there has been a long history of personal attacks against Robert Garside, I think you know this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:24, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Please do remember that the Robert Garside page, as you know, has been subjected to personal attacks for years using various pseudonyms and we thought the edit was about right, even though we had issues with the dispute section. Please note that personal libellous attacks have also appeared on Guinness World Records page and Royal Holloway University page. Who does it and how they do it is difficult to know for sure, which is why this page is monitored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:36, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
And talk about ownership issues, what about this page?
Franz Lidz ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Written by the guy himself. Reads like a resume.
E.g. Lidz chose journalism because "I wanted to find an 'ism' that wouldn't become a 'wasm'
Where is the reference to that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:39, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I have already explain why. The guy aggresively edited the article and it is unfair. We have covered this ground before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I am quite happy to detail our case if you provide me with an e-mail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:44, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, not sure if you will get this so I will put it here too, what I said was: Having to monitor these pages: Robert Garside, Guinness World Records, Royal Holloway University, is unfair. The balance of the article has to be considered and so does the fact that there are detractors who have edited the said pages negatively and maliciously. We think the page was fine 3 days ago and since no new events had taken place and no explanation given, we see this as a personal attack against a living person and must defend that at any cost. The article is about Robert Garside who ran around the world, received 2000 positive national and international media stories and not about those few nay-sayers who have nothing to say but negative things. They can use their own blogs for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 13:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I am a staffer at a publishing house in the United States. Part of my job is to oversee and monitor the Wikipedia entries of our authors. One of the entries that I am in charge of is the author Franz Lidz. For the past couple of months his entry has been under attack by Robert Garside, who has used at least three Wikipedia account names to make alterations. I and other members of my department have continually tried to undo his revisions -- yet he will not stop the harrassment. I have contacted other Wikipedia administrators, but they have been unable to make Mr. Garside cease his relentless edit wars. Is there anyone I can appeal to who might be so empowered. Thanks so much for your help. TruthBTold212 ( talk) 14:56, 22 November 2010 (UTC) TruthBTold (Bloomsbury USA)
Hi MRG, and hello to her many wonderful page stalkers who can also feel free to answer:
Is there a policy or guideline that suggests how to name articles related to America? I'm working on an article Slave breeding in the United States and it seems it might be better to call it Slave breeding in America. It is afterall, the United States of America. It's already a redirect, and I wanted to move the page, but thought I'd better ask as Wikipedia might have a style that is preferred. Malke 2010 ( talk) 16:47, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
if there is problem issue must be discussed in talk page and reverts by genaic is absolutely illogical. she keeps checking my contributions and is interfering with my work. she doesnt know anything about films of India. i am the person who has taken pain in improving many articles and also creating pages of films starring khanna and also bringing more info about khanna in his wiki page too. others have only checked grammatical or spelling mistakes of other's contribution no one has added any vital or information worthy of being mentioned in rajesh khanna main article or in his films
this genaic needs to stop interfering and should mind her own business iu have lost patience with her i think she needs to be blocked now. she keeps giving me warnings about me getting blocked. everwhere she is removing the word Superstar in rajesh khanna artciles....she has a personal problem with it ...she is biased.. Shrik88music ( talk) 21:24, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sitapur_Ki_Geeta&diff=cur&oldid=398008379 you can see here how she is biased. see the problem is she keeps removing most of the important things contributed by me. everywhere she boldly claims unCONSTRUCTIBLE AND UNEXPLAINED EDITS are made by me ...when the fact is its her who is first of all not aware of the film,khanna's role in it, etc.. she also removes the word superstar when already the needed reference has been provided and i keep ensuring iam adhering to wiki policy too. if you observe today that khanna article is 45kb long it cause i created filmography page and also added info..from 2008 onwards i alone have been adding the info ---quality info with references in khanna wiki page too in addtion pages i created pertaining to his films. others have only been creating nuisance..very few contributed to the article like some who checked the grammatical errors or wiki policy compliance.
iam not biased fan or something ..whatever contributions i have made till now are free of spelling errors and also references have been given too. Shrik88music ( talk) 22:09, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
earlier i had done so ...but now its of no use. see my talk page she claims the same thing again and again. the version put by me has no problem. she has problem with word superstar. now iam going to revert BEWFAI and Sitapur ki geeta to my version again. ask her to stop making reverts or edits to such articles in this manner. Shrik88music ( talk) 10:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
moonridden , common what iam saying is only the reaction to her continuous act of reverting well refereenced articles. u still have not responded to her completely baised act in artciles like -- bewafai,insaaf main karoonga and sitapur ki geeta. i showed you how in-spite of being well referenced she removed the informations i posted. like http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sitapur_Ki_Geeta&diff=cur&oldid=398008379
as far as your observation about ..."The rest of the story is about whether Asha gets a chance to convey her feelings for Ashok, how Renu became a mental patient, the relation between Renu and Ashok, how Ashok solves the problem and how the mystery gets unfolded." -- if at all there are grammatical error everyone is free to edit it. in fact everyone can improve the article. but right now people are delibrately removing the infos. i want others to improve the artcile with respect to grammer, spelkling , spacing etc... but removing vital , basic info is wrong ---
also iam not labeling him a superstar ....rajesh khanna was born years before and has ruled from 1969-1991 . so its not that iam claiming something. i have provided enough evidences ...genaic keeps saying absolute nonsense statements about my edits ---why that you are not seeing. Shrik88music ( talk) 16:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
I was away on tour and could not access Wikipedia. I found on return that a lot of content has been deleted. The articles
are based on content from 'The Jats, their role in the Mughal Empire' by Girish Chandra Dwivedi - 1989. The author of this book died long back at an early age of forty-one. As such these are not now copyrighted contents. Regards, burdak ( talk) 04:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
I was away on tour and when returned I found that Farmers' movements in India has been deleted. I t seems not fair. You wrote that article Farmers' movements in India seems to have been founded with content copied from The Encyclopaedia Indica (more detail is at the article's talk page). No proper justification was given for deletion. There seems no basis to delete it and there is no such information on the article's talk page about this. burdak ( talk) 04:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
—Preceding undated comment added 01:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC).
I notice that the CCI backlog continues to grow, to a point where it's unlikely it will ever be resolved with manual review. My understanding is that Corensearchbot only reviews new articles. Is there any way CSB could be used to review all diffs by a certain user, and that somehow a report could be generated using CSB combined with whatever tool we're currently using to generate the subpages? Have you ever talked to Coren about this? This would make sure many egregious violations are resolved quickly, and would make the pool for human review much smaller. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 14:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | ||
To Moonriddengirl in appreciation of the thoughtful advice you give and your kindness in being my mentor. Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 21:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC) |
And have a very happy and well deserved Thanksgiving holiday!
Malke 2010 (
talk) 21:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
This article Guillaume de Fontenay appears to be a copyvio of this page, although I did not check thoroughly. I know I keep promising to learn to tag the articles myself, but I am still without well adapted computer. I have removed most material and left just a stub, could you assist by removing the copyrighted material, if it is that?
As usual, thank you for the excellent work you give to wikipedia! -- Kleopatra ( talk) 23:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, On the log from the 16th, there's Peer-mediated Instruction tagged as copy / paste. Can't find any sources though. It does look like a copy from a word document, but I tried the tools, then a bunch of searches on Google scholar and books and came up empty. Mind having a look? MLauba ( Talk) 10:44, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I hope you're not reading this and enjoying Thanksgiving instead! Anyhow, I responded here. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 15:09, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
[6]. Can this indeed be re-licensed? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I did not need to sew one myself or need to visit a museum. I have a number of such Polish forced worker patches in my collection of Polish WWII artifacts that either belonged to my family or similar Polish familes whose members were deported to Germany as forced workers during WWII. So the original
belongs to me from my perosnal collection and I took a photograph of one particular version which was a better image than the image I replaced. Hope this clears up any confusion in a satisfactory manner? Krgds Sjam2004 ( talk) 18:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I think you will find you are wrong re modern art. The purchaser does own the copyright to the painting after the sale not the artist, and as a conseqeunce reproductions of the painting are the copyright of the artwork owner not the artist, it is the same with an original photographic positive or transparency (however not for an original print from an original negative as the photographer usually retains copyright in negative images but not positives sold to clients). But you are correct I do not own the copyright to the
emblem itself which is in the public domain as are most design works produced by state authorites, I only copyright entitlement to the photographic image of the emblem. Krgds Sjam2004 ( talk) 19:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
On a related subject, inspired by our little discussion, see this suggestion (Sjam2004, perhaps you'd like to join our project and help us out with that idea?). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for cleaning up the copywrite violations of Blow Molding. However, you blanked out all of the edits for a long time. Some of these are deletions are valid and should be added again. We cannot view the past edits to reconsider them. Please let us look at the deleted edits for us to restore valid ones. Thank you. Pkgx ( talk) 15:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. Having had the benefit of your expertise on two previous GAN reviews, I think I have a case of Wikipedia:Plagiarism that does not appear to involve Wikipedia:Copyrights. I would welcome your input at Talk:Petroleum industry in Iran/GA1. Thanks in anticipation. Pyrotec ( talk) 09:58, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Recent IP editor at her article and talkpage could be a banned sockpuppeteer. Consider name at bottom of Jenny Morris - Bio website. IP acknowledged this was their site, not the official jennymorris.com
Now see Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Tony Senatore and the various edits by those puppets at JM+talk. I suggest User:124.176.58.238 be added to this list. Further investigation is needed to unmask other possible puppets since June 2007 (last of previous outbreak?) that may have evaded detection. shaidar cuebiyar ( talk) 11:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Following discussion above I've started work on a CCI bot (my first bot) and have it reading from CCI pages quite happily and assessing some of the diffs. I may have gone a bit mad in what I'm currently thinking of getting this bot to do - see User:Dpmuk/DpmukBOT. Any comments (from Moonriddengirl or any talk page stalkers) on the relevant talk page would be much appreciated. Dpmuk ( talk) 14:23, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
In the middle of the picture the cracks tend to run parallel to the short sides. They spread from the middle towards the stressed locked edges, while the cracks starting at the short sides curl round as shown in the diagram.
In the middle of the picture the cracks tend to run parallel to the short sides. They spread from the middle towards the stressed locked edges, while the cracks starting at the short sides curl round. The stress at the corners is more than double that of the center.
I am just wondering why the information about William H. Young, 17th President of The National Association of Letter Carriers, was deleted. I know this may sound silly but he is my husband of over 25 years and every now and then I like to look at the page and remember some of his wonderful accomplishments. I understand that there are probably not many people who would be concerned about someones page being deleted, but it was to me,a testiment to his 40 years of contributions to labor and the working men and women of this great country..and as if you couldn't tell, I'm very proud of him. Anyway, just wanted to ask.
I would appreciate a reply and am at <redacted>
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Deborah Young 11-26-2010 173.66.138.63 ( talk) 04:26, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
For information the history of the deleted copyvio Listed buildings and structures in Anderton still exists in the Anderton Lancashire article. It was moved to a separate page on 15th October.-- 92.41.186.57 ( talk) 12:54, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
See User talk:Ylyandres. Not so many contributions to worry about, but I was led to that article from Bryan Stapleton where there was about a paragraph of direct copying. I think there may be a couple more. Charles Matthews ( talk) 16:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
When you get a moment, could you sniff around the contributions of the AUE ( talk · contribs)? One of his article got csd-tagged for copyright violations, but its been here for so long that I am concerned the other articles he's created may also be of the copy/paste variety. Since I know this happens to be your area of expertise I wonder if you could look into the matter or pass this info along to some one who can follow up on it to make sure whatever else s/he put up here is in fact from a free source. TomStar81 ( Talk) 04:19, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
While editing the Hal Abelson article I saw a note at the bottom of the page stating that the article contained information from the subject's personal website and that permission was granted to use the material. I went to the talk page to confirm (via OTRS ticket or somesuch) and there is a copy of an email posted wherein it appears that permission was indeed granted, however I'm doubtful that a cut and paste of the purported permission is sufficient to meet Wikipedia's copyright policies. Do you have any advice as to how to proceed? -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 19:05, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Another ( talk page stalker) comment. I think this is exactly the type of quesiton that needs a much wider community input. My slant is that "back in the day" Wikipedia allowed a lot of things which are no longer allowed without very explicit information about. This thread relates to text but for images it seems there was a bit more of a specific stance taken when Jimbo finally made the announcement that Non-commercial only and By Permission Only Images to be deleted in May of 2005. I don't see where any such statement was ever made about text. Although this in one of those "common sense" items that does not seem work in reverse. Most editors/admins would agree that use of full text from, say, a book is a clear copyvio and would be fairly silly to accept a non specific comment of "Sure go ahead" as permission to reprint everything. With files (images in particular) many editors/admins don't have any problem with using a full image and saying that "sure go ahead" is permission enough. Some don't even need that much, feeling a "self" license tag with zero other information is fine. And this is seen with current files, not just pre-2005 ones. I agree that "the old system didn't guarantee that the permission was genuine" but due to 2010 policies and growth of users I don't feel that "challenging that automatically assumes bad faith from every contributor who conformed to the practice of pre-OTRS days." But I know for a fact both Moonriddengirl and myself have been questioned and "attacked" when challenging some of these older "permissions". I don't believe there is any sort of blanket "grandfathering" for these permissions. It does need a wider audience I feel - at a foundation level would be great, but I don;t see that happening much anymore. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 16:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello again. Alex Abella, a BLP, is sourced mostly to a blog. Please do NOT click on any other links when you are at the blog, as it also locked up and crashed my browser when I went looking to source the remainder of the article. It is slightly rewritten, phrased moved to front or back, but it's a copyvio, the first 3 paragraphs, and, if it had not crashed my system, maybe the rest. Can you please remove the copyvio material from the history? As usual, many thanks for your valuable contributions to wikipedia. -- Kleopatra ( talk) 04:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
I happened by Wikipedia today, and tried to check on the status of my contribution, Cold War Legacies, but frankly I have obsoleted myself, and need to ask for your help, if any is needed. Because of an unrelated book I'm writing at the moment, I just don't have time to attend to this; in fact, I have no idea where the matter stands and I find the related Talk pages overwhelming.
As I mentioned before, I am the copyright holder for both Nuclear Shadowboxing and Nuclear Insights; so please help by taking care of the issues. Because I don't have any time to track the talk pages, any inquiries will have to be sent to me directly at waterfoxg@gmail.com
Sorry, but that's the best I can do. The Wikipedia relearning curve is too steep and time-consuming, and I admire those of you who have the time to persist. In fact, I'm a inveterate Wikipedia user/absorber for the unrelated book that I mentioned.
--Alex
____ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waterfox1 ( talk • contribs) 01:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
MRG, can you please take a look at File:Reema Khan.jpg and some other files from the same uploader, I had to delete a lot under F9 before but don't have the time to look through these currently. Also, I tagged B. M. Sreenivasaiah College of Engineering for copyvio clean up, it's a little tricky because different parts of it appear to have come from different edits, would've cleaned it up myself, but again, no wikitime currently. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 08:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
I am pretty sure that this edit, which is still in the article, is copyvio from [10]. I know that the bit about the snake goddess fetish is unsourceable elsewhere. Thanks. I'd delete it now but I'm dealing with one of those editors.... Dougweller ( talk) 13:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I have finished the main merge items, but the History of Mariology still needs spelling fixes, some link touch ups and further checks, but nothing major. But as you know historians do not really have a sense of time. So it can wait another day, although your help in fixing the copyright items will be appreciated. On that note the people I have seen that have no sense of time are the archeologists - for them a decade means nothing, and century is but an hour.... but that is another story. Cheers. History2007 ( talk) 16:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi MRG. You A7'd Genticity way back in 2007 and somehow it crept back. They've just posted Customer1 which is the same company again. I've A7'd them both, and if you get there before anyone else does or before the creator removes the tags it would be good. Perhaps also salt. Up to you. Cheers. -- Kudpung ( talk) 08:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
The Founders Intent has given you a
kitten! Kittens promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{ subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{ subst:Kittynap}}
I've left a question for you on History2007's page. Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 17:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl!
I was the admin for a page you deleted, and I hate to admit, but as I'm new to wikipedia I can't even seem to get logged back in.
17:01, 25 October 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Automotive Fleet & Leasing Association (AFLA)" (Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for over seven days)
There shouldn't be any copyright problems on that page, as we are the holder of the copyrighted materials. Were there just additional references that were needed? This page was a lot of work and is linked to by the Association and our Publications. Can you please assist me in bringing this page back up, or advising what I need to do to bring it back?? My boss will kill me that it's down.
Thanks!
Lauren Fletcher —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.23.116.114 ( talk) 22:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
I can't believe I am going to you again. In all the time I have been editing on WP I have only gone to an admin over obvious vandalism type scenarios. I have never had to approach an admin over normal editors and yet I have come to you twice over Malke. I know you have warned Malke before about addressing people as if they don't have a mind of their own. She is now going through all her numerous AfD pages and adding things to make it seem as if we are mindless people following History2007. She seems to not see that just because the people going against her just don't agree with her actions and her content. Due to the type of person I am I wouldn't open up a case against her, but cases have been opened up against editors for much less then she has done. Can you at least request that she not start any new AfD/merge requests within X amount of time? This is really taking away a lot of time that could be spent editing, updating articles. Marauder40 ( talk) 15:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Could you take a moment to update the {{ Di-no permission-notice}} tag? Almost every link is a redirect. I would do it myself but as it is locked I can't.
And this is just a pet peeve - but Wikipedia:Non-free content should be Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. The wording is "If you believe the media meets the criteria at..." and it makes more sense to link to the actual policy, not the guideline. I know, for whatever reason, a lot of the links go to the fair use guideline and not the policy and that has led to me having discussions with some editors and admins who feel that, because Wikipedia:Non-free content is only a guideline, nothing on that page is required. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 16:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
I contacted info-en-q@wikimedia.org a couple of weeks ago regarding my concerns with the Sassy Pandez page as you suggested, but I have not had a response. I therefore wanted to follow up with you again on this matter, and would be grateful if we could discuss further on my talk page. Thanks. AquilaUK ( talk) 23:35, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, MRG, if you get chance, please could you explain copyright and trademarks as they apply to logos in the above deletion review? Thanks— S Marshall T/ C 05:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Vegoia was recently created from an unknown number of unknown articles (see the edit summary when it was created). It's thus copyvio with no way to trace it back to the original editors. Any precedent for dealing with something like this? There's an AfD on a similar one, created from 3 named articles - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vegoia and Egeria. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 15:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi MRG, could you find the time for a look at Temporomandibular joint disorder? There's a remarkable overlap at this website, but it may be a reverse copyvio. The string "Gentle jaw stretching and relaxation exercises you can do at home. Your healthcare provider can recommend exercises for your particular condition" was inserted into the article in 2007. LeadSongDog come howl! 05:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
I have a question/request for help. Please take a look at User Talk: Md iet. The last section on the article Lulua Mosque is a bit confusing, and I can't figure out how to search for the info I need on previous instances of the article. Here's what I can figure out:
So, I'm wondering if you can look into the article history, and see where it was copied from. Note, further, that the editor has had problems with copyright in the past (on images), and has been blocked for being disruptive in other ways, so it may very well be that the editor did recreate a page deleted for copyright reasons and did so knowingly. So I guess in essence what I'm asking for is help trying to figure out if he 1) was associated with the prior instance of the article, and thus should know better, and 2) committed an intentional copyright violation by copying the information from a third source which i don't know. That is, is this a time to provide some instruction, or a time to provide some blocking?
I appreciate your assistance in this matter given all of the things you do. I'll watchlist your page, so feel free to reply either here or directly to MD iet. 07:02, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Bobdatty did a cut and paste page move of Newspaper wrapper to Wrapper (philately) thereby losing the history. Can you please fix it for us besides which the talk page was not moved. I have already told him that this is not the way we rename pages. TIA ww2censor ( talk) 19:00, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
hi,
i have no clue how to fix this, but i've seen the mess here is related to a user you then blocked ..
a google search to "Thomas Benjamin composer" finds the right article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pohick2/List_of_Nike_Locations
but obviously the main link is "broken"
thanks for your help fixing this,
kind regards.
88.153.20.54 ( talk) 19:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I know you're an editor with experience in dealing with copyright questions. I was wondering if you could look at the concerns I just noted about our article on the Battle of Stalingrad. I summarized them here. I'm not sure exactly what's going on - my gut tells me that the wording came from Beevor initially, so I'm not sure what it's doing in a published work from 2007 and in our article - but I can't say that for sure without my copy of Beevor's book in front of me. Anyhow, I just wanted to get some additional guidance on how best to proceed. Thanks. MastCell Talk 20:36, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
I simplified the tag so that it is clear to all that they should not post there in order to prevent more of this [13]. Malke 2010 ( talk) 11:28, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi MRG, I noticed this BLP Barbara-Rose Collins which is attributed and in quote marks but is basically a cut and copy of an external link http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=C000633 - a GOV site but should we be duplicating the content like that? Off2riorob ( talk) 12:38, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello again, M.
Concerning The Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory, deleted after 7-day notice at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Significance_and_Basic_Postulates_of_Economic_Theory, I have not been able to locate further details on the grounds for copyright violation. My impression was that the deleted article was well documented. I recall writing the future originator of the article, who had written a nice WP article on its author Terence W. Hutchison (oops!) when he had first expressed interest in writing such an article. I was happy to see that the article was well documented & met other standards (so I thought). The latter may always have been so in other cases for that Editor. Would you have any further details or any suggestions as to whether the article might be resuscitated or even restored (if its deletion was based on the not-always-applicable "not-proved-innocent" standard).* Thank you for your consideration. No rush here. * I note that you yourself have been active in salvaging articles, where feasible. -- Thomasmeeks ( talk) 15:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm feeling exceptionally uncreative today, so would it be possible for you or a stalker to help out with removing some bits of close paraphrasing in the rewrite of Adi Schwartz? There's some conversation and an example at User talk:VernoWhitney#Adi Schwartz. VernoWhitney ( talk) 19:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I assume this is not you? I didn't block right away because their contributions seemed OK-ish. Thoughts? TN X Man 20:01, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I have provided some links. These are actually pages in English on that site. Jezhotwells ( talk) 23:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC) Jezhotwells ( talk) 23:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi I am Charles Micklewright who has written around 99% of the content for the article "Lilford Hall". Much of the material has been obtained from the wesite www.lilfordhall.com which I have written and own. I am happy to grant permission under my copyright rights to Wikipedia for the article "Lilford Hall". How do we proceed so that the original article can be restored? My e-mail address is aziza@micklewrightc.freeserve.co.uk
Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.120.40.72 ( talk) 09:55, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Dear Moonriddengirl,
Can I ask you for help? Please have a quick look at a question on my talk page and the associated article, Yılmaz Onay, and tell me if my answer was correct (it's a copyvio issue signaled by CorenSearchBot). Thanks for your time! Drmies ( talk) 15:48, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Just want to run something by you. Mario Moya is up for CSD as a copyvio. Sure enough, the text matches this bio. However, the text in our article was added 2 September 2009. The bio doesn't have a date, but may be more current. (I checked Wayback, didn't find an older version, but that doesn't necessarily prove anything.)
Of relevance is the fact that the WP addition was by a user named Mario Moya. My guess is that the subject of the article added the bio material himself, and more or less simultaneously, used the same material for the website bio.
I don't have a clear copyvio, as I cannot dismiss the possibility that the WP article text came first. It might be a reverse copyvio, but I don't have enough facts to establish that as well.
However, it might be necessary to establish which is which if we thought the article should remain. My current thinking is to delete the article for other reasons, and not address the copyvio issues. I'm not quite comfortable with a speedy, so wondering if it should be a Prod.
This all may be moot in this specific instance if someone comes along and deletes it, but I'd be interested in your advice in any event.-- SPhilbrick T 17:32, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks for your help. I especially liked this rewrite [14]. Good work. Nik Sage ( talk) 01:07, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl. Could I be so bold as to ask that you clarify today's ending of Malke 2010's mentorship "due to disagreements about its administration" ? As you know, I was one of many who expressed concerns due to her multiple blocks, threads at ANI, etc. I also, as you recall, had highly unpleasant encounters with this editor, and was of the opinion that a lengthy block was called for under the circumstances but withdrew when mentorship was accepted; now I see that Malke 2010 has had still more blocks since that time.
For the record, and in the event additional ANI threads are started for this demonstrably problematic editor, could you please elaborate on the recent circumstances? I have your page watchlisted and will look for a reply here. Many thanks, Jusdafax 03:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
I have a delicate situation involving an admin which is clearly paraphrasing. The question is whether it is too close, because he introduced factual inaccuracies into it. Could you please take a look. The diff shows what he added from a single source http://www.plainsborohistory.org/turnpike.htm. I was the GA reviewer Talk:New Jersey Route 26/GA1 and repeatedly suggested that he get a second source or drop the paragraphs from the article. He told me at the outset that he didn't want any messages on his talk page from me, and withdrew the GA nomination without any message to my talk page or on the review page. I question the wisdom of leaving these paragraphs in the article, but I want a second opinion regarding whether the paraphrase is too close. Thanks, Racepacket ( talk) 16:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The article Kurtis Blow appears to be an unambiguous copyright violation of this site. Originally I tagged the article for CSD but reconsidered based upon the CSD tag that this instance might be more complicated. Therefor I removed the CSD tag and applied a maintenance tag, as well as notify you here. Please cause the correct action to ensue and I will watch from the sidelines Thank you and I am sorry for increasing your workload. My76 Strat 17:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know of a little dilemma with this CCI. I've been doing as much as I can to review the images that were marked as public domain or already had {{ Non-free use rationale}} full and valid, but the rest are mostly claimed for fair use with a sentence fragment such as "low res, no revenue loss, person is dead." A few times I've tagged these images for deletion for invalid fair use rationales, or I've tried to get the user to add the template, and the discussions ended up heated. The biggest cases of this went on here and here (look at the diffs). I'm not quite sure how to continue. The images in the CCI not yet reviewed are nearly all ones of this sort. Jsayre64 (talk) 20:48, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
For images whose rationales state the insufficient "low res, no revenue loss, person is dead," should I merge that into {{ Non-free use rationale}}, or should I tag for deletion with {{ di-disputed fair use rationale}}? I don't see any template that requests improving the rationale without also being a speedy deletion candidate, so it's a tough decision. Jsayre64 (talk) 22:28, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm not really sure where I'm supposed to take this, but I've heard you are the resident copyvio expert, so I'm hoping you (or a talk page stalker) can help me. On The Lees of Laughter's End, the "plot summary" section appears to just be a copy of the blurb of the book (although I can't actually prove it atm). So is that a copyright violation? Assuming the answer yes, what am I supposed to do? Originally I would have thought it would have been fine to just remove it, but with all that copyvio drama about a month ago, I somehow got the impression that it couldn't just be removed, an admin had to actually delete it from the page history. Any help at all would be appreciated. Thanks, Jenks24 ( talk) 07:56, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Not much point in the copyright lecture, as the contributor has been gone for years, but a baby CCI seems needed. I've confirmed copying in several articles. I'm conducting it at his or her user talk page. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:34, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Dear Moonriddengirl, the Robert Garside page is being attacked again. I would appreciate your intervention. Can you help? Dromeaz ( talk) 15:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
MRG, how do you update an existing CCI ( Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Vrghs jacob) to include more recent contributions? I just reverted copyvio text on one recent edit ( Special Protection Group) and there could be more since the CCI started. BTW, almost all contribs on Commons have been deleted and the user was blocked there for a week or so. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 04:12, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. You seem to be the go-to person for this, so I thought I'd ask. I'm wonder if there are any investigations at WP:CCI that I should try and prioritize over others. I see some have been up a long time, yet others are more high profile, etc. I'm busy wrapping up Texas141 right now; it's easy since the sources are already there so I can just look for copypastes. Are there any of the 40+ left you would suggest I try and do first? I could of course just pick them as I see them, though if any are urgent I can tackle them. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:39, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Good day or night,
Regarding the deletion of the following page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ultrasonic_impact_treatment
I need time to dig up a different source to which the author can release the copyright, email a release statement, or petition for un-deleting.
Background: The author of the deleted page for Ultrasonic Impact Treatment (TayHanes), is my client, Taylor Hanes, Chief Operating Officer of Applied Ultrasonics. See http://www.appliedultrasonics.com/rapidresponse.html for complete contact information.
Applied Ultrasonics is was formerly branded, "Esonix." See 0:50 here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRPZq8-jEmc.
The cited copyright violation was of the following content: http://books.google.com/books?id=uczkKDKn5HYC&lpg=PA225&dq=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&pg=PA226#v=onepage&q=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&f=false)
If you scroll up a page, to here http://books.google.com/books?id=uczkKDKn5HYC&lpg=PA225&dq=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&pg=PA225#v=onepage&q=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&f=true, you can see the authors of this content are L. Teheni and E. Statnikov.
E. Statnikov is the late Efim Statnikov, founder of Applied Ultrasonics, a.k.a. Esonix. See http://www.appliedultrasonics.com/company.html. L. Tehini was also a founding member.
Here http://books.google.com/books?id=uczkKDKn5HYC&lpg=PA225&dq=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&pg=PA225#v=onepage&q=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&f=true you can also see the title, "Esonix," which is the previously marketed name for Applied Ultrasonics (see 0:50 here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRPZq8-jEmc)
Summary: The author of the deleted page on Ultrasonic Impact Treatment is the COO of the company which employs the authors of the cited copyright infringement (thanks SuggestBot). I am looking into the easiest way to release the copyright: posting the content on their website with a release, adding a release to the Google Book, or emailing a release. Any advice as to which route is best would be greatly appreciated.
Or even better, if this is enough information to undelete the page, I will be so happy I'll do a little dance.
Cheers, Crockett -- 67.188.129.47 ( talk) 20:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Hey thanks for the quick response and thorough explanation!
Let me see if we can dig something up to post with a release on appliedultrasonics.com to which we can add a release:
Do I understand that if we post the source content on appliedultrasonics.com with a release, the page could then be un-deleted? I'm not a veteran Wiki editor, so the thought of copy/pasting with all of the citations is intimidating: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:LN-qDCvIW_AJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasonic_impact_treatment+ultrasonic+impact+treatment&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Thanks!
Crockett Dunn ( talk) 21:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Oooh! Can you show me what section looked like a copy/paste job, so the author can re-write it and cite other sources. UIT isn't my primary field, either.
Crockett Dunn (
talk) 21:27, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, I'm on it... 7 days.
Thanks Moonriddengirl!
Crockett Dunn ( talk) 21:58, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Is it correct to have the temp page in the :Talk area?
Sorry for that - a banned user had recreated several deleted article which he'd created originally, and I didn't look closely enough at that one. I've now restored it. For more information, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Smkovalinsky. Will Beback talk 00:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
The Cadfael Chronicles have been deleted, the author may be suspect but the article was valid. Can it be restored please Carl Sixsmith ( talk) 14:02, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I do understand that the creator is a serial copyright infringer. However, the article consisted of (i) two very short paragraphs followed by (ii) lists that (a) I think are unproblematic and (b) are tedious to re-create. What if I were to resuscitate the article with fresh introductory paragraphs written by me (and not plagiarized)? -- Hoary ( talk) 14:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'm a bit sleepy now, so I'll wait a day or two before resuscitating two thirds of the article (which will be the easy part) and writing the remaining third afresh. -- Hoary ( talk) 14:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi User:Akradecki had a draft of the Max Conrad article in his/her sandbox. In fact I left a message in User:Akradecki's talk page about putting on Wikipedia. I was under the impression User:Accolink2 saw the message and retrieved it. If you are unable to bring the article back would you please be open to bring the Max Conrad article from User:Akradecki's sandbox? Thank you- RFD ( talk) 15:13, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
If you can keep an eye on File:Mmix.png for me. It was tagged on December 1 and the tag has been repeatedly removed by the uploaded. I have warned them and given them a final notice now. They posted a question on December 1 that I replied to ( What's the right license for File:Mmix.png?) but they did not seem to care based on the edit summary's. If I revert the image again I would be in violation of 3RR. Thanks. (EDIT: They just reverted it again, now claiming the image is in Public Domain and adding a {{ PD-author}}. EDIT 2: They have supposedly sent an email to OTRS as well now so you can kill two birds with one stone so to speak.) Soundvisions1 ( talk) 04:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Wondering if you had checked OTRS On this. I am wondering if it was actually sent. A new comment on their talk page says: The author replied, but was quite annoyed at being contacted again. I should have gone with my instincts and never listened to you. Sigh. Lets put this to bed now is what I say - take a look in the OTRS system and if there is none there than remove the {{ OTRS pending}} tag and go back to the December 1 tag the uploader kept removing (Was set to be deleted yesterday - December 8) as the {{ PD-author}} tag added on December 7 would prove to be false. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 22:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up this article, but unfortunately you left a <ref> tag without any information in it and deleted the revisions where it was introduced, so I can't fix it. shoy ( reactions) 17:12, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
For helping find a solution to the matter at this place. I have suggested the matter be archived. Take care and Have a great day! Mercy11 ( talk) 00:34, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. This listing has come due for admin closure, and I have a question for you there. Hopefully, we'll be able to close out that matter soon. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:37, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
File:2-kristin20rt.jpg. Still tagged as you left it when you checked OTRS on it in August. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 15:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
I hope you will question the real identity of CanadianLinuxUser. Given his style of arguing on the Robert Garside page, we feel we know his identity. Be careful. 87.82.116.134 ( talk) 16:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
MRG, we had this conversation a while earlier on scanned signatures. Apparently the policy at Commons is a little different in that signatures don't appear to be copyrightable. Just thought I'd let you know since more of our editors appear to be getting autographs. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 16:53, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
An editor told me, "You disagree that plagiarism is widespread on Wikipedia? Perhaps you should check out WP:CP and meet the good folks at WP:CCP." I doubt that plagiarism is widespread on Wikipedia. Who is correct? Thanks. -- LegitimateAndEvenCompelling ( talk) 07:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. I wasn't 100% sure where to post this, but since I've noticed you in quite a few copyright discussions talking sense, I thought I'd check with you... if it would be better on a noticeboard, feel free to copy it there. I've been following discussions All Day (album) for a few days, it's a mashup of songs, and editors have been identifying the samples in order and by length and timing. Following a discussion on the page, since this was clear WP:OR, the information was removed. However, a source has now been found, which includes start times for the samples at Fastcompany, all shown on a big image. I've transcribed the information to Talk:All Day (album)/FastCompany, so we now appear to have a decent compromise - not OR, but with the information that people are looking for. My only worry is that this is a copyright violation, taking so much information from the image. It will be referenced clearly, but I thought I'd double check if that's sufficient. Oh yes, by the way a number of news outlets have told fans to check for track listings on Wikipedia, as has the artist himself on Twitter, just to make things more fun. Worm 10:26, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
... on User talk:Moonriddengirl/Archive 30#The Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory. --16:40, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl. This is Dromeaz. This is confidential. Please look at the contributions made by CanadianLinuxUser. We believe him to be Phil Essam. He is an arch enemy with Robert Garside. He has been hassling Robert Garside's colleagues, sponsors and other associates since the year 2000. That is 10 years. He drew the Robert Garside page into an edit war in 2007 and isn't becoming an established user/administrator, just a ploy? Look at his historic contributions. And I am the one to get blocked? This is absolutely ridiculous! 87.82.116.134 ( talk) 17:13, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
FYI: I am not Phil Essam. I've been a contributor of Wikipedia on and off since April 2008. I was updating the Jesper Olsen page noticed the edits of this user and learned the story of Robert Garside. Email me if you need real information
CanadianLinuxUser (
talk) 18:18, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Moonriddengirl,
This is Preventionbetterthancure, the author of the article about Communities That Care.
Thanks for your note about the copyright issues. If I understand correctly, the copyright issue is because the Blueprints for Violence Prevention website now has a PDF summary of Communities That Care posted on their website. Since I wrote the article, CTC has been found to be effective in an experimental, controlled trial in 24 communities. Blueprints has subsequently reviewed the research and has decided to declare CTC as one of its 'promising' programs. Hence their post. I think if you review the article I wrote about CTC, you won't find exactly the same language between the Wiki article and the Blueprints PDF.
CTC is in the public domain, and CSAP (Center for Substance Abuse Prevention) of the US Govt officially owns all the CTC manuals and materials. They had posted those materials on their website, but have recently revised their website and in so doing (temporarily) lost the link to the CTC materials. The materials can temporarily be found at www.communitiesthatcare.org.
I hope this explanation is sufficient to have you remove the block on the article! It is encouraging to me to see from your comments that there are 20 page views per day, telling me that at least some people out there in communities trying to do something to help their youth are looking for info about CTC.
Please let me know if this explanation is not sufficient, and I will see what I can do. thanks very much, Preventionbetterthancure ( talk) 01:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
...so says the editor who uploaded File:Cover SimonSues.jpg and a couple of others. I can't tell if that's true or not, but I did find it interesting that this indicates lots of deletions for copyvio reasons. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 01:14, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
First, let me say sorry your not feeling well and I know that Migraines are an, excuse the pun, real headache and I hope your feeling better soon. Due to the ongoing discussions about the recent bot run I submitted a recommendation regarding the current policy of dealing with copyright violators at the Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) here to modify slightly the wording of the current policy. -- Kumioko ( talk) 15:15, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help); Unknown parameter |isbn10=
ignored (
help)This looks like very light paraphrasing of the sources that it cites, to me. Compare Gana sangh kshatriya#About Gana and Kshatriya Rulers with Singh 2008, pp. 267, for example. What do you think? Does it rise to the level of zapping and starting again? Uncle G ( talk) 17:50, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
There was no single hereditary monarch in Gana. Instead there was a chief known as Ganapati, Ganajyestha, Ganaraja, or Sanghamukhya, and a aristocratic council which met in a hall called the Santhagara. Effective executive power and day-to-day political management must have been in hands of smaller group.
There was no single hereditary monarch in Gana. Instead, there was a chief (known variously as Ganapati, Ganajyestha, Ganaraja, or Sanghamukhya), and an aristocratic council which met in a hall called the santhagara. Effective executive power and day-to-day political management must have been in the hands of a smaller group.
The Ganas greatest assets – governance through discussion - were also their greatest weakness. They were vulnerable to internal dissension, especially when faced with aggressive monarchies. In the Lalitvistara, the future Buddha is described as sitting in heaven, thinking of his impending birth. One of the questions raised is; which family should he born in? The other bodhisattvas and gods discuss and reject the candidature of the Lichchhavis of Vaishali. They say that these people do not speak to each other in proper manner. Do not follow the Dharma, do not preserve the ranks of social status and age, do not become anybodys disciples, and each one thinks,’ I am king, I am king. The Arthshashtra asserts that Sanghas were unassailable and advises the king to win over friendly ones. It suggests that head of sangha should remain self controlled and just towards other members, and should do what is beneficial and agreeable to all others.
The ganas greatest asset – governance through discussion - was also their greatest weakness. They were vulnerable to internal dissension, especially when faced with aggressive monarchies. In the Lalitvistara, the future Buddha is described as sitting in heaven, thinking of his impending birth. One of the questions raised is: Which family should he born in? The other bodhisattvas and gods discuss and reject the candidature of the Lichchhavis of Vaishali. They say that these people do not speak to each other in proper manner, do not follow the dharma, do not preserve the ranks of social status and age, do not become anybodys disciples, and each one thinks, 'I am king, I am king.' The Arthshashtra asserts that sanghas were unassailable and advises the king to win over friendly ones. It suggests that head of a sangha should remain self controlled and just towards other members, and should do what is beneficial and agreeable to all others.
Thank you. It's good to have my opinion confirmed. Uncle G ( talk) 15:17, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay, so I finally tagged an article with a copyvio tag, but it's actually an Afc submission. My thought is, the editors who monitor Afc will take care of the matter? Does it require removing information from the edit history? It may be public domain material, as it is Minnesota government, but the plagiarized portion came from a signed article. I suggested the writer can deal with the plagiarism-only issue, if it is public domain, in some manner, if they choose.
As usual thanks to you for your contributions to wikipedia. (And your talk page stalkers.) -- Kleopatra ( talk) 20:25, 11 December 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 25 | ← | Archive 28 | Archive 29 | Archive 30 | Archive 31 | Archive 32 | → | Archive 35 |
Hi Moonriddengirl, if you have time, would you mind looking at the above? Lilian Govey is a one-paragraph article, with all but one sentence paraphrased from Richard Dalby's The Golden Age of Children's Book Illustration (1991). Not sure whether it's close enough to count as a copyvio; or whether the words would be considered ordinary enough so that a degree of similarity was inevitable. The editor was not pleased by recent similar inquiries, so I thought I ought to check it with you, and ask what the procedure is (re: tagging, removing, deleting).
Dalby: "She illustrated several books for Harrap, Wells Gardner & Darton (under the pseudonym 'JL Gilmour', following a disagreement with this company), Dean (Dean's Happy Common Series; The Book of Happy Gnomes), Nelson (The Old Fairy Tales), and especially Humphrey Milford (The Rose Fairy Book; Nursery Rhymes from Animal Lands) who also employed her talents in several playbooks, Christmas annuals, and the 'Postcards for the Little Ones' Series."
"She spent most of her adult life in a remote Sussex cottage, where she where she became devoted to the study of local history, folk lore and spiritualism."
Wikipedia: "She illustrated for the publishers Harrap, Wells Gardner & Dean (using the pseudonym J.L. Gilmour), Dean, Nelson, and Humphrey Milford. Books include Dean's Happy Christmas Series, The Book of Happy Gnomes, The Old Fairy Tales, The Rose Fairy Book, and Nursery Rhymes from Animal Lands. For Humphrey Milford she illustrated several playbooks, Christmas annuals, and the Postcards for the Little Ones series. Govey passed most of her adult life in a remote Sussex cottage studying folklore, spiritualism, and local history."
Margaret Tarrant has two such paragraphs. The sources are this article by Denise Ortakales, and Richard Dalby's The Golden Age of Children's Book Illustration.
Dalby, p. 134: Besides her many children's books, Margaret Tarrant's postcards, calendars and silhouette designs were enormously popular. The plates in her edition of Nursery Rhymes (1914) were reissued as 48 bestselling postcards. Reproductions of her best-known painting, 'The Piper of Dreams', sold by the thousand to decorate sitting-rooms around the land. Her religious paintings achieved a great following in the 1920s and 1930s, especially 'He Prayeth Best', depicting a shepherd boy kneeling on a hilltop.
Wikipedia, citing Dalby: Besides her children's books, Tarrant's postcards, calendars, and silhouettes were extremely popular. Reproductions of The Piper of Dreams sold in the thousands, and the 48 plates from her best-selling Nursery Rhymes of 1914 were issued as sets of postcards. Her religious paintings of the 1920s and 1930s were extremely popular, especially He Prayeth Best, a depiction of a praying shepherd boy.
Ortakales: She has exhibited at the Royal Academy and the Royal Society of Artists in Birmingham. By 1953, her health and eyesight was deteriorating. Within a few years, she gave up her house in Peaslake to live with her friend Molly Brett in Cornwall. She died on 28 July 1959. She left her pictures to her friends and her estate to twelve charities.
Wikipedia, citing Dalby and Ortakales: She exhibited at the Royal Academy and the Royal Society of Artists in Birmingham. In the early 1950s, her health and eyesight deteriorated, and, within a few years, she left her house in Peaslake to join her friend Molly Brett in Cornwall. She died on 28 July 1959, leaving her pictures to friends and her estate to twelve charities.
SlimVirgin talk| contribs 21:44, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
( edit conflict) You may wish to pay attention to the edits from Susanne2009NYC ( talk · contribs); not only does this fit in with same plagiaristic pattern, I have suspicion to believe that this is a returned sock of a banned user. I am going to investigate into this, likely with CU. – MuZemike 22:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
I would appreciate your advice on a copyright issue. About a week ago User:Fram started summarily deleting subpages from under User:Geo Swan. One of those subpages was User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/Brookings lists of released captives -- speedy deleted as a copyright violation.
I initiated a deletion review Wikipedia:DRV#User:Geo_Swan/Guantanamo/Brookings lists of released captives. It was closed early by an administrator who chose not to take a stand on whether it was a copyright violation. That admin emailed me a tiny rump of the of the original page -- entirely worthless. I left a message on their talk page not long afterwards, with what I intended to be some good faith questions about where to get the copyright issue resolved. But they haven't been online in almost a week, and haven't responded. I have however subsequently been emailed the full source.
I'd be very grateful if you would look at the deleted page.
I have done a lot of work on the Guantanamo captives habeas corpus cases -- probably hundreds of hours. This page, or a version of it, would be very useful to me as an aid to correlating which captives were included in which habeas corpus petitions. I have doubts over whether the original deleting administrator's action was firmly based in policy. But, if, for the sake of argument it was. A stripped down version of the page, that still allowed me to correlate the habeas petitions with the captives, would remain extremely useful to me.
Thanks for your help Geo Swan ( talk) 22:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I'm looking to find out if Wikipedia has any images of paintings by Jacob Lawrence or other African American painters for an article I'm rewriting. Don't remember what I did with that search link you gave me a while back. Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 00:00, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I thought I was doing the right thing but apparently it was "too close paraphrasing". I looked at the case page (or whatever it is) and didn't understand it. It looks all too complicated for me. I'm willing to cooperate but I don't know what you want me to do. It's impossible for me to go back and clean this stuff up. Just blank the pages. Susanne2009NYC ( talk) 00:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi again MRG, if you have time (and there's no rush), I was wondering if I could ask you about using the Internet Archive when checking for copyvios.
I tagged Wanda Gág as a copyvio today because several paragraphs are identical to this webpage, which seems no longer to be online, but which I found on the Internet Archive.
I want to be certain that it was Wikipedia copying the website and not the other way round. The material was added to Wikipedia in November 2006 in this edit. So far as I can tell that material has been on the website since before November 2006. There is an Internet Archive log of the website's pages here, and if you go into, say, the March 2004 version, you can click through to a list of illustrators here (which has the year 2004 in its URL), and from there to the page our article seems to copy from.
I have one small concern, and that is that the actual webpage for Wanda Gág does not have its own URL. That is, to get to (what I assume is) the March 2004 version, I have to click on the list of illustratrators for that month, and then click on Wanda Gág, but the URL doesn't change. So I'm not sure how I can be 100 percent certain that some of the Gág material is not from a later date. I'm wondering if there's a way to nail it down, i.e. to date that particular webpage.
I hope I'm not being an idiot and missing something obvious. :) SlimVirgin talk| contribs 15:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
Too often great editors like you are overlooked and not given the credit deserved for all their great contributions. So I am awarding you this barnstar to let you know I greatly appreciate all you do for Wikipedia, and please keep up the outstanding work!! CTJF83 chat 03:17, 17 November 2010 (UTC) |
MRG, I just tagged File:Anushka Shetty.jpg as F9, but notice that you'd done some deletions but retained this version, so can you check before it's deleted? cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 20:42, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Also, could you take a look at East Indians, was tagged as copyvio a while back, and then I went on wikation and someone removed the tag. I don't see an OTRS note and the site doesn't seem to have a release note either, the article history has the tags etc. It popped up on my watchlist now and I remembered! cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 21:19, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I had asked Iridescent to look over an article that I had worked on some time ago Edward M. Cotter (fireboat) for copyright/plagerism problems and she suggested I contact you. I want to be sure that I'm not holding too close to my sources and if changes should be made. I realize that you're busy but if you could look at the SS Canadiana article for similar problems. I have also printed and read the pdf about plagiarism and it is helpful. Thanks Shinerunner (talk) 22:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I see that there has been some activity today on the Sassy Pandez page, and some additional references have been added as a result. You may remember that when we first can discussing this page a couple of years we requested that my clients full name was removed from the page for personal safety reasons, but the new references that have been added today include this name, which again raises a very real personal safety issue. Please can we discuss this further, ideally on my Talk page. Thanks. AquilaUK ( talk) 23:31, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Awesomeness | ||
Please accept a belated (but very sincere) "Thank You" for the time and effort you put into writing those two Copyright articles for The Bugle. I believe I've also managed to find an award you haven't actually got yet. EyeSerene talk 13:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC) |
Incidentally, this barnstar was hand-drawn by a University of British Columbia student during the FA-Team's first mission... and is unofficially the coolest (and officially the least tasteful) barnstar on the 'pedia. Enjoy :) EyeSerene talk 13:22, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
|
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Presented with many thanks for your hard work in explaining and fixing copyright violations, for raising awareness of the pitfalls, and for helping to keep Wikipedians on the side of the angels. SlimVirgin talk| contribs 13:34, 18 November 2010 (UTC) |
IN RE: Copyright Talk Page
I wasn't sure where/how to continue. If I am posting in the wrong area, please move it back or whatever is proper.
So, I found the license you spoke of and added it to my wiki. It is located in the footer and the link sends you here. I believe this is kinda what you were driving at. I will need to go into each file I've imported and write a note in the Summary and that will take a bit of time, but I want to make sure I am on track. It's never been so much about the legalese and such, more of a belief that there is right and wrong in the world; the military drove that in my head! :) I want to make sure I get stuff right and acceptable to folks both on Wikipedia and at large as I hope to set an example with others who visit to my site; to show that there is a proper way to use other folks' materials. Thanx! -- Foreclosurepedia ( talk) 00:58, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
Almost a week ago a message appeared on my talk page regarding possible copy violations with the Wikipedia article on Jenny Morris (musician), I indicated to User:124.176.58.238 that the article's talk page was a more appropriate venue for the discussion. I transferred the material there and also posted the concerns, as I understood them, at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2010 November 11 but have received no response. Since that time, User:124.176.58.238 has repeatedly deleted a segment of the article (and sources) which has been reverted by myself and by two other editors. Subsequent edits by User:124.176.58.238 have added the claim that the information is "taken from my bio". I believe this is information which is independently verifiable and that no copy violation has occurred. shaidar cuebiyar ( talk) 05:43, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
It has been sometime since we last talked. I noticed that you closed Eastern chipmunk because of suspected copyright violations. Frankly, I think your action was overkill. I tried to find the sentence you gave as an example but could not find it anywhere in the article. I also noticed that many reputable editors have been contributing to the article and now their efforts have been lost. Can you clarify what parts of the article are violations? It is not obvious in such a long and well edited article. This is a rather important article since it is a well known, well loved, and common animal. It should not be blanked out for long. Cheers. DGERobertson 01:55, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. Could you have a quick look at this fair use rational being claimed for the infobox of a living person, seems a bit weak to me, I have nominated it at files for deletion here - seems like a very weak excuse for fair use to me .. thoughts? No hurry, no worry. Off2riorob ( talk) 12:00, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
h r u?
no msgs since long?
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Rajesh_Khanna&oldid=397498516
this contains some added info and corrections. do guard it ..i mean u may check it and ensure if at all some idiots make wrong chnages u will revert to my version .. Shrik88music ( talk) 09:41, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl. I'm in contact with the people who sent the message with the permission. May I ask you what's missing there? Is it the correct license? I'd like to let them know, as they're quite confused (they know very little about copyright policy of Wikipedia, and my explanation (I wrote them an e-mail) was perhaps unclear.) Thanks for any hints. Kind regards. -- Vejvančický ( talk | contribs) 13:00, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I have made a few posts on my talk but have not received any feedback from Administrators so I'm communicating directly with you as you helped me previously. I now have three letters of authorisation to use pictures on the 44 Parachute Brigade (South Africa) article and would like to know how I can proceed from here. Can you please reply and give me guidance?
kind regards
--Smikect 16:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Smikect ( talk • contribs)
By the way thank you for realizing the mistakes on those articles and I am sorry for any trouble I might have caused. − Jhenderson 777 21:51, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Cookies! | ||
For you! 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}}! |
MRG, I'm going through Indian actor cats to eliminate copyvio images (finished Category:Tamil actors so far), and I came across this image. I have no reason to not believe that the editor who uploaded this is the painter, but his website seems to be selling this image through a third party site with a certain copyright policy. I don't see an OTRS ticket either. The editor is not active currently, so I'm not sure leaving a talk page message would help. What should be done here? cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 17:31, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Check this edit and see if it is true. I was going to rollback but the user seems to been a long term user. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 18:31, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=TWINS&curid=29650154&diff=397739134&oldid=397735144. I had thought my edit summary was adequate. -- W☯W t/ c 20:47, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
the reason i put it was to indicate that semi protection is needed....to notify it i have even given a written statement Shrik88music ( talk) 14:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC) thanks for what u did now .. this is the same thing i had asked for....there are very few people like u , hebrides and e ripley who edit articles fruitfully other wise there are some who just dont want to contribute fruitfully Shrik88music ( talk) 14:19, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
MRG, this is going to be one awfully big CCI.
I'm going to be traveling Thursday, preparing tomorrow, but I've started:
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 02:12, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Hey Moonriddengirl, I just wanted to let you know that Ottava put up a source review of the one FA that Kathyrine contributed to, To Autumn, here. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 19:38, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
I don't know where to report this since the ILT stuff is all over the place now, but you may know how to deal with this. I found this image File:Old Mr. Prickly Pin.JPG which was uploaded by Susanne2009NYC and by now has been moved to commons, even though it shouldn't have been since none of Potter's illustrations are PD in the UK. She has several more uploaded pics at commons too: [2] Siawase ( talk) 22:41, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
Also Confirmed is SoniaSyle ( talk · contribs); those contribs need to likewise be scrutinized as with the others. One of the articles she worked on, Cry (Michael Jackson song), is a GA. – MuZemike 21:58, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, I don't know how to update the CCI, but so far have identified close paraphrasing or direct quotations on each of the articles I've looked at. Three are almost completely scrubbed: The Story of Miss Moppet, The Tale of Mr. Jeremy Fisher and The Tale of Peter Rabbit. Truthkeeper88 ( talk) 03:06, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
I notice you did some work removing copyvios from this terribly written article, and archived part of the talk page. I had already archived it and it looks like you might have archived my archive (nested archives??) but that's not what I'm here about. On the archive that I created, I left in a section that was a blatant copyvio so I could review it and possibly rewrite it, but I never got around to it. And I shouldn't have left it in the first place. I've removed the "introductory text" bit from the archive page, but you may want to go further and remove it from the page history, which I can't do. Ivanvector ( talk) 17:10, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
The text you are TAGGING as copyvio has been altered thus complying with the set of Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA 3.0 policy. Yes, the article was once tagged as copyvio although it has now been altered or changed. You may just be saying that a article may be deleted if it had any copyvio a year ago. It is in the history but you must understand it has been changed! Thank you. Jaime 070996 20:57, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
I just noticed your post here, and saw the backwards copy vio template at the top of the page. Of course it's a great idea to tag articles in that way, but I wonder if it would be even more useful if instead of (or as well as) posting your comments to the talk page, as you did, the template could be altered to have a "show/hide" section in which your comments could be pasted. That way a future editor who comes across the apparently copyvioed text would be able to see the results of your work and not have to wonder whether you made a mistake. Do you think this would be useful? Mike Christie (talk) 13:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
hello i have been observing the comments posted in shrik88music talk page . thier some of the users kept on telling him that wiki wants exactly the same things as written in the source.i would hve modified like how shrik has been doing. now its getting absolutely confusing as to what is needed. why a double stance is being taken . there is bound to be copyright issue if directly scenetnce is copied so why not modify the words?
as far as links are concerned they are authentic and info needs to be added . why dont you help in incorporating the info i had copy pasted? Quicklight ( talk) 17:24, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
do see the rajesh khanna talk page. Quicklight ( talk) 17:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
i will wait for a day and see whether the so called editors who opposed are genuinely interested in contributing to the article. i would modify the words and sentences and ensure the info i had pasted comes in separate para. can u recommend me some like minded individuals..who can help in modifying the sentences. info was vital to make all wiki readers of future to understand that he formed "popular on screen" or hit pairs with those 7 actresses in particular. Quicklight ( talk) 18:04, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
Do you, or any of your lurkers, have Gale Literature Resource Center accounts? I haven't, so I'm unable to check whether this is a copyright violation of the sources cited. I've cleaned up the article to make it easier to check. Uncle G ( talk) 15:21, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello MRG. I was wandering if you could help me. If you look at
List of 90210 episodes you'll see in the section for the third season it include information from the lead of the season 3 article. Even though, the "only include" things are used. Season 1 and 2 sections only include the episodes like they're supposed to. Any ideas on what caused it? Thank you.
Jayy008 (
talk) 18:46, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
My bad, ignore me! Jayy008 ( talk) 18:48, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
With regard to the Ropbert Garside kerfuffle, it's worth you contacting Panyd ( talk · contribs), who was handling a closely related OTRS ticket. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry ( talk) 19:10, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl, sorry to bother you with this, but if you have a minute, could you take a look at Talk:Rajesh Khanna and comment on the text I've suggested there, in the section Talk:Rajesh_Khanna#whats_the_issue? I'm a little worried about the words "popular on-screen pairs" which is the same wording as in this source; there may be a better way of phrasing it so we can avoid it altogether, but perhaps a three-word noun phrase wouldn't constitute a copyright problem? After all, there is a limited number of ways you can express the concept, and I imagine that if "popular on-screen pairs" is a copyright problem, then e.g. "popular pairs on the screen" would also be problematic. Quoting the source verbatim might conceivably work, of course, but there are already quite a lot of direct citations in the article. (I think I may have spent too much time reading about this, today, and my brain is shutting down. There are probably ten obvious rephrasings that would remove the problem altogether :-) ) Anyway, I'd appreciate it tremendously if you could weigh in on this particular issue. -- bonadea contributions talk 19:07, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
i dont think its a big copyright issue --- fact can be represented only in this manner ir. he formed onscreen hit pairs with.... Quicklight ( talk) 17:57, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
from the above discussion its clear that there is no copyright issue as far as the sentence "He formed popular onscreen pairs with with Sharmila Tagore, Asha Parekh, Mumtaz in the seventies and with Hema Malini, Tina Munim, Shabana Azmi, Smita Patil and Poonam Dhillon in eighties in many romances and social melodramas and films from a range of different genres." - so can i paste this ???? if any1 reverts it foolishly you can talk to them Quicklight ( talk) 17:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, In 2007 Mr. Garside got his world record which is WHY this person became an editor in 2007. They drove this article into an edit war because they are an opponent of Mr. Garside. They have, on and off, been edit warring with Mr. Garside for years under different names. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 11:52, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
For one, Mr. Garside has the world record and here, the weighting is wrong. We have been into this before with Wikipedia UK (legal) and I will not revisit the same discussion as was discussed in 2007. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:06, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Plus, no one is talking about locking articles, but why all the changes? Nothing has happened to this story to warrant changes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:08, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
No tangible reason to change the article as it stood on 19th November has been asserted. Therefore one assumes that the edit that is negative towards Mr. Garside has been conducted by the same detractors who did this in 2007 and 2009. We cannot allow this kind of harrassment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:12, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Oh I see, YOU own the article do you? Negative and unwarranted edits are not acceptable. We have been through this before, for years. What was wrong with the article as it stood on 19th November 2010? Do explain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:15, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, I really do not want to get into a dispute with you over this, but frankly, no changes to this article are warranted. Can you explain why this article needs to be changed at all? Please note that on 19th November, just 3 days ago, the article was fine and since then aggressive changes took place, that we do not agree with. We know who is doing it and we intend to protect the reputation of this living person, Robert Garside. Wikipedia has a policy on living person and with regards to the article itself, there has been a long history of personal attacks against Robert Garside, I think you know this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:24, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Please do remember that the Robert Garside page, as you know, has been subjected to personal attacks for years using various pseudonyms and we thought the edit was about right, even though we had issues with the dispute section. Please note that personal libellous attacks have also appeared on Guinness World Records page and Royal Holloway University page. Who does it and how they do it is difficult to know for sure, which is why this page is monitored. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:36, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
And talk about ownership issues, what about this page?
Franz Lidz ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Written by the guy himself. Reads like a resume.
E.g. Lidz chose journalism because "I wanted to find an 'ism' that wouldn't become a 'wasm'
Where is the reference to that? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:39, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I have already explain why. The guy aggresively edited the article and it is unfair. We have covered this ground before. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I am quite happy to detail our case if you provide me with an e-mail. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 12:44, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl, not sure if you will get this so I will put it here too, what I said was: Having to monitor these pages: Robert Garside, Guinness World Records, Royal Holloway University, is unfair. The balance of the article has to be considered and so does the fact that there are detractors who have edited the said pages negatively and maliciously. We think the page was fine 3 days ago and since no new events had taken place and no explanation given, we see this as a personal attack against a living person and must defend that at any cost. The article is about Robert Garside who ran around the world, received 2000 positive national and international media stories and not about those few nay-sayers who have nothing to say but negative things. They can use their own blogs for that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dromeaz ( talk • contribs) 13:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
I am a staffer at a publishing house in the United States. Part of my job is to oversee and monitor the Wikipedia entries of our authors. One of the entries that I am in charge of is the author Franz Lidz. For the past couple of months his entry has been under attack by Robert Garside, who has used at least three Wikipedia account names to make alterations. I and other members of my department have continually tried to undo his revisions -- yet he will not stop the harrassment. I have contacted other Wikipedia administrators, but they have been unable to make Mr. Garside cease his relentless edit wars. Is there anyone I can appeal to who might be so empowered. Thanks so much for your help. TruthBTold212 ( talk) 14:56, 22 November 2010 (UTC) TruthBTold (Bloomsbury USA)
Hi MRG, and hello to her many wonderful page stalkers who can also feel free to answer:
Is there a policy or guideline that suggests how to name articles related to America? I'm working on an article Slave breeding in the United States and it seems it might be better to call it Slave breeding in America. It is afterall, the United States of America. It's already a redirect, and I wanted to move the page, but thought I'd better ask as Wikipedia might have a style that is preferred. Malke 2010 ( talk) 16:47, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
if there is problem issue must be discussed in talk page and reverts by genaic is absolutely illogical. she keeps checking my contributions and is interfering with my work. she doesnt know anything about films of India. i am the person who has taken pain in improving many articles and also creating pages of films starring khanna and also bringing more info about khanna in his wiki page too. others have only checked grammatical or spelling mistakes of other's contribution no one has added any vital or information worthy of being mentioned in rajesh khanna main article or in his films
this genaic needs to stop interfering and should mind her own business iu have lost patience with her i think she needs to be blocked now. she keeps giving me warnings about me getting blocked. everwhere she is removing the word Superstar in rajesh khanna artciles....she has a personal problem with it ...she is biased.. Shrik88music ( talk) 21:24, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sitapur_Ki_Geeta&diff=cur&oldid=398008379 you can see here how she is biased. see the problem is she keeps removing most of the important things contributed by me. everywhere she boldly claims unCONSTRUCTIBLE AND UNEXPLAINED EDITS are made by me ...when the fact is its her who is first of all not aware of the film,khanna's role in it, etc.. she also removes the word superstar when already the needed reference has been provided and i keep ensuring iam adhering to wiki policy too. if you observe today that khanna article is 45kb long it cause i created filmography page and also added info..from 2008 onwards i alone have been adding the info ---quality info with references in khanna wiki page too in addtion pages i created pertaining to his films. others have only been creating nuisance..very few contributed to the article like some who checked the grammatical errors or wiki policy compliance.
iam not biased fan or something ..whatever contributions i have made till now are free of spelling errors and also references have been given too. Shrik88music ( talk) 22:09, 22 November 2010 (UTC)
earlier i had done so ...but now its of no use. see my talk page she claims the same thing again and again. the version put by me has no problem. she has problem with word superstar. now iam going to revert BEWFAI and Sitapur ki geeta to my version again. ask her to stop making reverts or edits to such articles in this manner. Shrik88music ( talk) 10:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
moonridden , common what iam saying is only the reaction to her continuous act of reverting well refereenced articles. u still have not responded to her completely baised act in artciles like -- bewafai,insaaf main karoonga and sitapur ki geeta. i showed you how in-spite of being well referenced she removed the informations i posted. like http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Sitapur_Ki_Geeta&diff=cur&oldid=398008379
as far as your observation about ..."The rest of the story is about whether Asha gets a chance to convey her feelings for Ashok, how Renu became a mental patient, the relation between Renu and Ashok, how Ashok solves the problem and how the mystery gets unfolded." -- if at all there are grammatical error everyone is free to edit it. in fact everyone can improve the article. but right now people are delibrately removing the infos. i want others to improve the artcile with respect to grammer, spelkling , spacing etc... but removing vital , basic info is wrong ---
also iam not labeling him a superstar ....rajesh khanna was born years before and has ruled from 1969-1991 . so its not that iam claiming something. i have provided enough evidences ...genaic keeps saying absolute nonsense statements about my edits ---why that you are not seeing. Shrik88music ( talk) 16:01, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
I was away on tour and could not access Wikipedia. I found on return that a lot of content has been deleted. The articles
are based on content from 'The Jats, their role in the Mughal Empire' by Girish Chandra Dwivedi - 1989. The author of this book died long back at an early age of forty-one. As such these are not now copyrighted contents. Regards, burdak ( talk) 04:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
I was away on tour and when returned I found that Farmers' movements in India has been deleted. I t seems not fair. You wrote that article Farmers' movements in India seems to have been founded with content copied from The Encyclopaedia Indica (more detail is at the article's talk page). No proper justification was given for deletion. There seems no basis to delete it and there is no such information on the article's talk page about this. burdak ( talk) 04:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
—Preceding undated comment added 01:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC).
I notice that the CCI backlog continues to grow, to a point where it's unlikely it will ever be resolved with manual review. My understanding is that Corensearchbot only reviews new articles. Is there any way CSB could be used to review all diffs by a certain user, and that somehow a report could be generated using CSB combined with whatever tool we're currently using to generate the subpages? Have you ever talked to Coren about this? This would make sure many egregious violations are resolved quickly, and would make the pool for human review much smaller. Calliopejen1 ( talk) 14:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | ||
To Moonriddengirl in appreciation of the thoughtful advice you give and your kindness in being my mentor. Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 21:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC) |
And have a very happy and well deserved Thanksgiving holiday!
Malke 2010 (
talk) 21:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
This article Guillaume de Fontenay appears to be a copyvio of this page, although I did not check thoroughly. I know I keep promising to learn to tag the articles myself, but I am still without well adapted computer. I have removed most material and left just a stub, could you assist by removing the copyrighted material, if it is that?
As usual, thank you for the excellent work you give to wikipedia! -- Kleopatra ( talk) 23:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, On the log from the 16th, there's Peer-mediated Instruction tagged as copy / paste. Can't find any sources though. It does look like a copy from a word document, but I tried the tools, then a bunch of searches on Google scholar and books and came up empty. Mind having a look? MLauba ( Talk) 10:44, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
I hope you're not reading this and enjoying Thanksgiving instead! Anyhow, I responded here. Best, Voceditenore ( talk) 15:09, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
[6]. Can this indeed be re-licensed? -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 16:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I did not need to sew one myself or need to visit a museum. I have a number of such Polish forced worker patches in my collection of Polish WWII artifacts that either belonged to my family or similar Polish familes whose members were deported to Germany as forced workers during WWII. So the original
belongs to me from my perosnal collection and I took a photograph of one particular version which was a better image than the image I replaced. Hope this clears up any confusion in a satisfactory manner? Krgds Sjam2004 ( talk) 18:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I think you will find you are wrong re modern art. The purchaser does own the copyright to the painting after the sale not the artist, and as a conseqeunce reproductions of the painting are the copyright of the artwork owner not the artist, it is the same with an original photographic positive or transparency (however not for an original print from an original negative as the photographer usually retains copyright in negative images but not positives sold to clients). But you are correct I do not own the copyright to the
emblem itself which is in the public domain as are most design works produced by state authorites, I only copyright entitlement to the photographic image of the emblem. Krgds Sjam2004 ( talk) 19:51, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
On a related subject, inspired by our little discussion, see this suggestion (Sjam2004, perhaps you'd like to join our project and help us out with that idea?). -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 20:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for cleaning up the copywrite violations of Blow Molding. However, you blanked out all of the edits for a long time. Some of these are deletions are valid and should be added again. We cannot view the past edits to reconsider them. Please let us look at the deleted edits for us to restore valid ones. Thank you. Pkgx ( talk) 15:38, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. Having had the benefit of your expertise on two previous GAN reviews, I think I have a case of Wikipedia:Plagiarism that does not appear to involve Wikipedia:Copyrights. I would welcome your input at Talk:Petroleum industry in Iran/GA1. Thanks in anticipation. Pyrotec ( talk) 09:58, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Recent IP editor at her article and talkpage could be a banned sockpuppeteer. Consider name at bottom of Jenny Morris - Bio website. IP acknowledged this was their site, not the official jennymorris.com
Now see Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Tony Senatore and the various edits by those puppets at JM+talk. I suggest User:124.176.58.238 be added to this list. Further investigation is needed to unmask other possible puppets since June 2007 (last of previous outbreak?) that may have evaded detection. shaidar cuebiyar ( talk) 11:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Following discussion above I've started work on a CCI bot (my first bot) and have it reading from CCI pages quite happily and assessing some of the diffs. I may have gone a bit mad in what I'm currently thinking of getting this bot to do - see User:Dpmuk/DpmukBOT. Any comments (from Moonriddengirl or any talk page stalkers) on the relevant talk page would be much appreciated. Dpmuk ( talk) 14:23, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
In the middle of the picture the cracks tend to run parallel to the short sides. They spread from the middle towards the stressed locked edges, while the cracks starting at the short sides curl round as shown in the diagram.
In the middle of the picture the cracks tend to run parallel to the short sides. They spread from the middle towards the stressed locked edges, while the cracks starting at the short sides curl round. The stress at the corners is more than double that of the center.
I am just wondering why the information about William H. Young, 17th President of The National Association of Letter Carriers, was deleted. I know this may sound silly but he is my husband of over 25 years and every now and then I like to look at the page and remember some of his wonderful accomplishments. I understand that there are probably not many people who would be concerned about someones page being deleted, but it was to me,a testiment to his 40 years of contributions to labor and the working men and women of this great country..and as if you couldn't tell, I'm very proud of him. Anyway, just wanted to ask.
I would appreciate a reply and am at <redacted>
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Deborah Young 11-26-2010 173.66.138.63 ( talk) 04:26, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
For information the history of the deleted copyvio Listed buildings and structures in Anderton still exists in the Anderton Lancashire article. It was moved to a separate page on 15th October.-- 92.41.186.57 ( talk) 12:54, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
See User talk:Ylyandres. Not so many contributions to worry about, but I was led to that article from Bryan Stapleton where there was about a paragraph of direct copying. I think there may be a couple more. Charles Matthews ( talk) 16:04, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
When you get a moment, could you sniff around the contributions of the AUE ( talk · contribs)? One of his article got csd-tagged for copyright violations, but its been here for so long that I am concerned the other articles he's created may also be of the copy/paste variety. Since I know this happens to be your area of expertise I wonder if you could look into the matter or pass this info along to some one who can follow up on it to make sure whatever else s/he put up here is in fact from a free source. TomStar81 ( Talk) 04:19, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
While editing the Hal Abelson article I saw a note at the bottom of the page stating that the article contained information from the subject's personal website and that permission was granted to use the material. I went to the talk page to confirm (via OTRS ticket or somesuch) and there is a copy of an email posted wherein it appears that permission was indeed granted, however I'm doubtful that a cut and paste of the purported permission is sufficient to meet Wikipedia's copyright policies. Do you have any advice as to how to proceed? -- Jezebel'sPonyo bons mots 19:05, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
Another ( talk page stalker) comment. I think this is exactly the type of quesiton that needs a much wider community input. My slant is that "back in the day" Wikipedia allowed a lot of things which are no longer allowed without very explicit information about. This thread relates to text but for images it seems there was a bit more of a specific stance taken when Jimbo finally made the announcement that Non-commercial only and By Permission Only Images to be deleted in May of 2005. I don't see where any such statement was ever made about text. Although this in one of those "common sense" items that does not seem work in reverse. Most editors/admins would agree that use of full text from, say, a book is a clear copyvio and would be fairly silly to accept a non specific comment of "Sure go ahead" as permission to reprint everything. With files (images in particular) many editors/admins don't have any problem with using a full image and saying that "sure go ahead" is permission enough. Some don't even need that much, feeling a "self" license tag with zero other information is fine. And this is seen with current files, not just pre-2005 ones. I agree that "the old system didn't guarantee that the permission was genuine" but due to 2010 policies and growth of users I don't feel that "challenging that automatically assumes bad faith from every contributor who conformed to the practice of pre-OTRS days." But I know for a fact both Moonriddengirl and myself have been questioned and "attacked" when challenging some of these older "permissions". I don't believe there is any sort of blanket "grandfathering" for these permissions. It does need a wider audience I feel - at a foundation level would be great, but I don;t see that happening much anymore. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 16:42, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello again. Alex Abella, a BLP, is sourced mostly to a blog. Please do NOT click on any other links when you are at the blog, as it also locked up and crashed my browser when I went looking to source the remainder of the article. It is slightly rewritten, phrased moved to front or back, but it's a copyvio, the first 3 paragraphs, and, if it had not crashed my system, maybe the rest. Can you please remove the copyvio material from the history? As usual, many thanks for your valuable contributions to wikipedia. -- Kleopatra ( talk) 04:34, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
I happened by Wikipedia today, and tried to check on the status of my contribution, Cold War Legacies, but frankly I have obsoleted myself, and need to ask for your help, if any is needed. Because of an unrelated book I'm writing at the moment, I just don't have time to attend to this; in fact, I have no idea where the matter stands and I find the related Talk pages overwhelming.
As I mentioned before, I am the copyright holder for both Nuclear Shadowboxing and Nuclear Insights; so please help by taking care of the issues. Because I don't have any time to track the talk pages, any inquiries will have to be sent to me directly at waterfoxg@gmail.com
Sorry, but that's the best I can do. The Wikipedia relearning curve is too steep and time-consuming, and I admire those of you who have the time to persist. In fact, I'm a inveterate Wikipedia user/absorber for the unrelated book that I mentioned.
--Alex
____ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Waterfox1 ( talk • contribs) 01:25, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
MRG, can you please take a look at File:Reema Khan.jpg and some other files from the same uploader, I had to delete a lot under F9 before but don't have the time to look through these currently. Also, I tagged B. M. Sreenivasaiah College of Engineering for copyvio clean up, it's a little tricky because different parts of it appear to have come from different edits, would've cleaned it up myself, but again, no wikitime currently. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 08:52, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
I am pretty sure that this edit, which is still in the article, is copyvio from [10]. I know that the bit about the snake goddess fetish is unsourceable elsewhere. Thanks. I'd delete it now but I'm dealing with one of those editors.... Dougweller ( talk) 13:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I have finished the main merge items, but the History of Mariology still needs spelling fixes, some link touch ups and further checks, but nothing major. But as you know historians do not really have a sense of time. So it can wait another day, although your help in fixing the copyright items will be appreciated. On that note the people I have seen that have no sense of time are the archeologists - for them a decade means nothing, and century is but an hour.... but that is another story. Cheers. History2007 ( talk) 16:38, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi MRG. You A7'd Genticity way back in 2007 and somehow it crept back. They've just posted Customer1 which is the same company again. I've A7'd them both, and if you get there before anyone else does or before the creator removes the tags it would be good. Perhaps also salt. Up to you. Cheers. -- Kudpung ( talk) 08:06, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
The Founders Intent has given you a
kitten! Kittens promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.
Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{ subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or kittynap their kitten with {{ subst:Kittynap}}
I've left a question for you on History2007's page. Thanks. Malke 2010 ( talk) 17:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl!
I was the admin for a page you deleted, and I hate to admit, but as I'm new to wikipedia I can't even seem to get logged back in.
17:01, 25 October 2010 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Automotive Fleet & Leasing Association (AFLA)" (Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for over seven days)
There shouldn't be any copyright problems on that page, as we are the holder of the copyrighted materials. Were there just additional references that were needed? This page was a lot of work and is linked to by the Association and our Publications. Can you please assist me in bringing this page back up, or advising what I need to do to bring it back?? My boss will kill me that it's down.
Thanks!
Lauren Fletcher —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.23.116.114 ( talk) 22:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
I can't believe I am going to you again. In all the time I have been editing on WP I have only gone to an admin over obvious vandalism type scenarios. I have never had to approach an admin over normal editors and yet I have come to you twice over Malke. I know you have warned Malke before about addressing people as if they don't have a mind of their own. She is now going through all her numerous AfD pages and adding things to make it seem as if we are mindless people following History2007. She seems to not see that just because the people going against her just don't agree with her actions and her content. Due to the type of person I am I wouldn't open up a case against her, but cases have been opened up against editors for much less then she has done. Can you at least request that she not start any new AfD/merge requests within X amount of time? This is really taking away a lot of time that could be spent editing, updating articles. Marauder40 ( talk) 15:02, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Could you take a moment to update the {{ Di-no permission-notice}} tag? Almost every link is a redirect. I would do it myself but as it is locked I can't.
And this is just a pet peeve - but Wikipedia:Non-free content should be Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. The wording is "If you believe the media meets the criteria at..." and it makes more sense to link to the actual policy, not the guideline. I know, for whatever reason, a lot of the links go to the fair use guideline and not the policy and that has led to me having discussions with some editors and admins who feel that, because Wikipedia:Non-free content is only a guideline, nothing on that page is required. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 16:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
I contacted info-en-q@wikimedia.org a couple of weeks ago regarding my concerns with the Sassy Pandez page as you suggested, but I have not had a response. I therefore wanted to follow up with you again on this matter, and would be grateful if we could discuss further on my talk page. Thanks. AquilaUK ( talk) 23:35, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi, MRG, if you get chance, please could you explain copyright and trademarks as they apply to logos in the above deletion review? Thanks— S Marshall T/ C 05:32, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Vegoia was recently created from an unknown number of unknown articles (see the edit summary when it was created). It's thus copyvio with no way to trace it back to the original editors. Any precedent for dealing with something like this? There's an AfD on a similar one, created from 3 named articles - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vegoia and Egeria. Thanks. Dougweller ( talk) 15:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi MRG, could you find the time for a look at Temporomandibular joint disorder? There's a remarkable overlap at this website, but it may be a reverse copyvio. The string "Gentle jaw stretching and relaxation exercises you can do at home. Your healthcare provider can recommend exercises for your particular condition" was inserted into the article in 2007. LeadSongDog come howl! 05:29, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
I have a question/request for help. Please take a look at User Talk: Md iet. The last section on the article Lulua Mosque is a bit confusing, and I can't figure out how to search for the info I need on previous instances of the article. Here's what I can figure out:
So, I'm wondering if you can look into the article history, and see where it was copied from. Note, further, that the editor has had problems with copyright in the past (on images), and has been blocked for being disruptive in other ways, so it may very well be that the editor did recreate a page deleted for copyright reasons and did so knowingly. So I guess in essence what I'm asking for is help trying to figure out if he 1) was associated with the prior instance of the article, and thus should know better, and 2) committed an intentional copyright violation by copying the information from a third source which i don't know. That is, is this a time to provide some instruction, or a time to provide some blocking?
I appreciate your assistance in this matter given all of the things you do. I'll watchlist your page, so feel free to reply either here or directly to MD iet. 07:02, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Bobdatty did a cut and paste page move of Newspaper wrapper to Wrapper (philately) thereby losing the history. Can you please fix it for us besides which the talk page was not moved. I have already told him that this is not the way we rename pages. TIA ww2censor ( talk) 19:00, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
hi,
i have no clue how to fix this, but i've seen the mess here is related to a user you then blocked ..
a google search to "Thomas Benjamin composer" finds the right article
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pohick2/List_of_Nike_Locations
but obviously the main link is "broken"
thanks for your help fixing this,
kind regards.
88.153.20.54 ( talk) 19:19, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. I know you're an editor with experience in dealing with copyright questions. I was wondering if you could look at the concerns I just noted about our article on the Battle of Stalingrad. I summarized them here. I'm not sure exactly what's going on - my gut tells me that the wording came from Beevor initially, so I'm not sure what it's doing in a published work from 2007 and in our article - but I can't say that for sure without my copy of Beevor's book in front of me. Anyhow, I just wanted to get some additional guidance on how best to proceed. Thanks. MastCell Talk 20:36, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
I simplified the tag so that it is clear to all that they should not post there in order to prevent more of this [13]. Malke 2010 ( talk) 11:28, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi MRG, I noticed this BLP Barbara-Rose Collins which is attributed and in quote marks but is basically a cut and copy of an external link http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=C000633 - a GOV site but should we be duplicating the content like that? Off2riorob ( talk) 12:38, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello again, M.
Concerning The Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory, deleted after 7-day notice at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Significance_and_Basic_Postulates_of_Economic_Theory, I have not been able to locate further details on the grounds for copyright violation. My impression was that the deleted article was well documented. I recall writing the future originator of the article, who had written a nice WP article on its author Terence W. Hutchison (oops!) when he had first expressed interest in writing such an article. I was happy to see that the article was well documented & met other standards (so I thought). The latter may always have been so in other cases for that Editor. Would you have any further details or any suggestions as to whether the article might be resuscitated or even restored (if its deletion was based on the not-always-applicable "not-proved-innocent" standard).* Thank you for your consideration. No rush here. * I note that you yourself have been active in salvaging articles, where feasible. -- Thomasmeeks ( talk) 15:24, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I'm feeling exceptionally uncreative today, so would it be possible for you or a stalker to help out with removing some bits of close paraphrasing in the rewrite of Adi Schwartz? There's some conversation and an example at User talk:VernoWhitney#Adi Schwartz. VernoWhitney ( talk) 19:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I assume this is not you? I didn't block right away because their contributions seemed OK-ish. Thoughts? TN X Man 20:01, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
I have provided some links. These are actually pages in English on that site. Jezhotwells ( talk) 23:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC) Jezhotwells ( talk) 23:39, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi I am Charles Micklewright who has written around 99% of the content for the article "Lilford Hall". Much of the material has been obtained from the wesite www.lilfordhall.com which I have written and own. I am happy to grant permission under my copyright rights to Wikipedia for the article "Lilford Hall". How do we proceed so that the original article can be restored? My e-mail address is aziza@micklewrightc.freeserve.co.uk
Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.120.40.72 ( talk) 09:55, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Dear Moonriddengirl,
Can I ask you for help? Please have a quick look at a question on my talk page and the associated article, Yılmaz Onay, and tell me if my answer was correct (it's a copyvio issue signaled by CorenSearchBot). Thanks for your time! Drmies ( talk) 15:48, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Just want to run something by you. Mario Moya is up for CSD as a copyvio. Sure enough, the text matches this bio. However, the text in our article was added 2 September 2009. The bio doesn't have a date, but may be more current. (I checked Wayback, didn't find an older version, but that doesn't necessarily prove anything.)
Of relevance is the fact that the WP addition was by a user named Mario Moya. My guess is that the subject of the article added the bio material himself, and more or less simultaneously, used the same material for the website bio.
I don't have a clear copyvio, as I cannot dismiss the possibility that the WP article text came first. It might be a reverse copyvio, but I don't have enough facts to establish that as well.
However, it might be necessary to establish which is which if we thought the article should remain. My current thinking is to delete the article for other reasons, and not address the copyvio issues. I'm not quite comfortable with a speedy, so wondering if it should be a Prod.
This all may be moot in this specific instance if someone comes along and deletes it, but I'd be interested in your advice in any event.-- SPhilbrick T 17:32, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
Just wanted to say thanks for your help. I especially liked this rewrite [14]. Good work. Nik Sage ( talk) 01:07, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello Moonriddengirl. Could I be so bold as to ask that you clarify today's ending of Malke 2010's mentorship "due to disagreements about its administration" ? As you know, I was one of many who expressed concerns due to her multiple blocks, threads at ANI, etc. I also, as you recall, had highly unpleasant encounters with this editor, and was of the opinion that a lengthy block was called for under the circumstances but withdrew when mentorship was accepted; now I see that Malke 2010 has had still more blocks since that time.
For the record, and in the event additional ANI threads are started for this demonstrably problematic editor, could you please elaborate on the recent circumstances? I have your page watchlisted and will look for a reply here. Many thanks, Jusdafax 03:36, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
I have a delicate situation involving an admin which is clearly paraphrasing. The question is whether it is too close, because he introduced factual inaccuracies into it. Could you please take a look. The diff shows what he added from a single source http://www.plainsborohistory.org/turnpike.htm. I was the GA reviewer Talk:New Jersey Route 26/GA1 and repeatedly suggested that he get a second source or drop the paragraphs from the article. He told me at the outset that he didn't want any messages on his talk page from me, and withdrew the GA nomination without any message to my talk page or on the review page. I question the wisdom of leaving these paragraphs in the article, but I want a second opinion regarding whether the paraphrase is too close. Thanks, Racepacket ( talk) 16:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
The article Kurtis Blow appears to be an unambiguous copyright violation of this site. Originally I tagged the article for CSD but reconsidered based upon the CSD tag that this instance might be more complicated. Therefor I removed the CSD tag and applied a maintenance tag, as well as notify you here. Please cause the correct action to ensue and I will watch from the sidelines Thank you and I am sorry for increasing your workload. My76 Strat 17:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
I just wanted to let you know of a little dilemma with this CCI. I've been doing as much as I can to review the images that were marked as public domain or already had {{ Non-free use rationale}} full and valid, but the rest are mostly claimed for fair use with a sentence fragment such as "low res, no revenue loss, person is dead." A few times I've tagged these images for deletion for invalid fair use rationales, or I've tried to get the user to add the template, and the discussions ended up heated. The biggest cases of this went on here and here (look at the diffs). I'm not quite sure how to continue. The images in the CCI not yet reviewed are nearly all ones of this sort. Jsayre64 (talk) 20:48, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
For images whose rationales state the insufficient "low res, no revenue loss, person is dead," should I merge that into {{ Non-free use rationale}}, or should I tag for deletion with {{ di-disputed fair use rationale}}? I don't see any template that requests improving the rationale without also being a speedy deletion candidate, so it's a tough decision. Jsayre64 (talk) 22:28, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm not really sure where I'm supposed to take this, but I've heard you are the resident copyvio expert, so I'm hoping you (or a talk page stalker) can help me. On The Lees of Laughter's End, the "plot summary" section appears to just be a copy of the blurb of the book (although I can't actually prove it atm). So is that a copyright violation? Assuming the answer yes, what am I supposed to do? Originally I would have thought it would have been fine to just remove it, but with all that copyvio drama about a month ago, I somehow got the impression that it couldn't just be removed, an admin had to actually delete it from the page history. Any help at all would be appreciated. Thanks, Jenks24 ( talk) 07:56, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Not much point in the copyright lecture, as the contributor has been gone for years, but a baby CCI seems needed. I've confirmed copying in several articles. I'm conducting it at his or her user talk page. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 14:34, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Dear Moonriddengirl, the Robert Garside page is being attacked again. I would appreciate your intervention. Can you help? Dromeaz ( talk) 15:22, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
MRG, how do you update an existing CCI ( Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Vrghs jacob) to include more recent contributions? I just reverted copyvio text on one recent edit ( Special Protection Group) and there could be more since the CCI started. BTW, almost all contribs on Commons have been deleted and the user was blocked there for a week or so. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 04:12, 6 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. You seem to be the go-to person for this, so I thought I'd ask. I'm wonder if there are any investigations at WP:CCI that I should try and prioritize over others. I see some have been up a long time, yet others are more high profile, etc. I'm busy wrapping up Texas141 right now; it's easy since the sources are already there so I can just look for copypastes. Are there any of the 40+ left you would suggest I try and do first? I could of course just pick them as I see them, though if any are urgent I can tackle them. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 16:39, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Good day or night,
Regarding the deletion of the following page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ultrasonic_impact_treatment
I need time to dig up a different source to which the author can release the copyright, email a release statement, or petition for un-deleting.
Background: The author of the deleted page for Ultrasonic Impact Treatment (TayHanes), is my client, Taylor Hanes, Chief Operating Officer of Applied Ultrasonics. See http://www.appliedultrasonics.com/rapidresponse.html for complete contact information.
Applied Ultrasonics is was formerly branded, "Esonix." See 0:50 here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRPZq8-jEmc.
The cited copyright violation was of the following content: http://books.google.com/books?id=uczkKDKn5HYC&lpg=PA225&dq=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&pg=PA226#v=onepage&q=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&f=false)
If you scroll up a page, to here http://books.google.com/books?id=uczkKDKn5HYC&lpg=PA225&dq=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&pg=PA225#v=onepage&q=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&f=true, you can see the authors of this content are L. Teheni and E. Statnikov.
E. Statnikov is the late Efim Statnikov, founder of Applied Ultrasonics, a.k.a. Esonix. See http://www.appliedultrasonics.com/company.html. L. Tehini was also a founding member.
Here http://books.google.com/books?id=uczkKDKn5HYC&lpg=PA225&dq=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&pg=PA225#v=onepage&q=%22ultrasonic%20impact%20treatment%22&f=true you can also see the title, "Esonix," which is the previously marketed name for Applied Ultrasonics (see 0:50 here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aRPZq8-jEmc)
Summary: The author of the deleted page on Ultrasonic Impact Treatment is the COO of the company which employs the authors of the cited copyright infringement (thanks SuggestBot). I am looking into the easiest way to release the copyright: posting the content on their website with a release, adding a release to the Google Book, or emailing a release. Any advice as to which route is best would be greatly appreciated.
Or even better, if this is enough information to undelete the page, I will be so happy I'll do a little dance.
Cheers, Crockett -- 67.188.129.47 ( talk) 20:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Hey thanks for the quick response and thorough explanation!
Let me see if we can dig something up to post with a release on appliedultrasonics.com to which we can add a release:
Do I understand that if we post the source content on appliedultrasonics.com with a release, the page could then be un-deleted? I'm not a veteran Wiki editor, so the thought of copy/pasting with all of the citations is intimidating: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:LN-qDCvIW_AJ:en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultrasonic_impact_treatment+ultrasonic+impact+treatment&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=firefox-a
Thanks!
Crockett Dunn ( talk) 21:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Oooh! Can you show me what section looked like a copy/paste job, so the author can re-write it and cite other sources. UIT isn't my primary field, either.
Crockett Dunn (
talk) 21:27, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
OK, I'm on it... 7 days.
Thanks Moonriddengirl!
Crockett Dunn ( talk) 21:58, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Is it correct to have the temp page in the :Talk area?
Sorry for that - a banned user had recreated several deleted article which he'd created originally, and I didn't look closely enough at that one. I've now restored it. For more information, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Smkovalinsky. Will Beback talk 00:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
The Cadfael Chronicles have been deleted, the author may be suspect but the article was valid. Can it be restored please Carl Sixsmith ( talk) 14:02, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I do understand that the creator is a serial copyright infringer. However, the article consisted of (i) two very short paragraphs followed by (ii) lists that (a) I think are unproblematic and (b) are tedious to re-create. What if I were to resuscitate the article with fresh introductory paragraphs written by me (and not plagiarized)? -- Hoary ( talk) 14:23, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Fair enough. I'm a bit sleepy now, so I'll wait a day or two before resuscitating two thirds of the article (which will be the easy part) and writing the remaining third afresh. -- Hoary ( talk) 14:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi User:Akradecki had a draft of the Max Conrad article in his/her sandbox. In fact I left a message in User:Akradecki's talk page about putting on Wikipedia. I was under the impression User:Accolink2 saw the message and retrieved it. If you are unable to bring the article back would you please be open to bring the Max Conrad article from User:Akradecki's sandbox? Thank you- RFD ( talk) 15:13, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
If you can keep an eye on File:Mmix.png for me. It was tagged on December 1 and the tag has been repeatedly removed by the uploaded. I have warned them and given them a final notice now. They posted a question on December 1 that I replied to ( What's the right license for File:Mmix.png?) but they did not seem to care based on the edit summary's. If I revert the image again I would be in violation of 3RR. Thanks. (EDIT: They just reverted it again, now claiming the image is in Public Domain and adding a {{ PD-author}}. EDIT 2: They have supposedly sent an email to OTRS as well now so you can kill two birds with one stone so to speak.) Soundvisions1 ( talk) 04:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Wondering if you had checked OTRS On this. I am wondering if it was actually sent. A new comment on their talk page says: The author replied, but was quite annoyed at being contacted again. I should have gone with my instincts and never listened to you. Sigh. Lets put this to bed now is what I say - take a look in the OTRS system and if there is none there than remove the {{ OTRS pending}} tag and go back to the December 1 tag the uploader kept removing (Was set to be deleted yesterday - December 8) as the {{ PD-author}} tag added on December 7 would prove to be false. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 22:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for cleaning up this article, but unfortunately you left a <ref> tag without any information in it and deleted the revisions where it was introduced, so I can't fix it. shoy ( reactions) 17:12, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
For helping find a solution to the matter at this place. I have suggested the matter be archived. Take care and Have a great day! Mercy11 ( talk) 00:34, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi. This listing has come due for admin closure, and I have a question for you there. Hopefully, we'll be able to close out that matter soon. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:37, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
File:2-kristin20rt.jpg. Still tagged as you left it when you checked OTRS on it in August. Soundvisions1 ( talk) 15:15, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
I hope you will question the real identity of CanadianLinuxUser. Given his style of arguing on the Robert Garside page, we feel we know his identity. Be careful. 87.82.116.134 ( talk) 16:20, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
MRG, we had this conversation a while earlier on scanned signatures. Apparently the policy at Commons is a little different in that signatures don't appear to be copyrightable. Just thought I'd let you know since more of our editors appear to be getting autographs. cheers. — Spaceman Spiff 16:53, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
An editor told me, "You disagree that plagiarism is widespread on Wikipedia? Perhaps you should check out WP:CP and meet the good folks at WP:CCP." I doubt that plagiarism is widespread on Wikipedia. Who is correct? Thanks. -- LegitimateAndEvenCompelling ( talk) 07:48, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Hi Moonriddengirl. I wasn't 100% sure where to post this, but since I've noticed you in quite a few copyright discussions talking sense, I thought I'd check with you... if it would be better on a noticeboard, feel free to copy it there. I've been following discussions All Day (album) for a few days, it's a mashup of songs, and editors have been identifying the samples in order and by length and timing. Following a discussion on the page, since this was clear WP:OR, the information was removed. However, a source has now been found, which includes start times for the samples at Fastcompany, all shown on a big image. I've transcribed the information to Talk:All Day (album)/FastCompany, so we now appear to have a decent compromise - not OR, but with the information that people are looking for. My only worry is that this is a copyright violation, taking so much information from the image. It will be referenced clearly, but I thought I'd double check if that's sufficient. Oh yes, by the way a number of news outlets have told fans to check for track listings on Wikipedia, as has the artist himself on Twitter, just to make things more fun. Worm 10:26, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
... on User talk:Moonriddengirl/Archive 30#The Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory. --16:40, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Moonriddengirl. This is Dromeaz. This is confidential. Please look at the contributions made by CanadianLinuxUser. We believe him to be Phil Essam. He is an arch enemy with Robert Garside. He has been hassling Robert Garside's colleagues, sponsors and other associates since the year 2000. That is 10 years. He drew the Robert Garside page into an edit war in 2007 and isn't becoming an established user/administrator, just a ploy? Look at his historic contributions. And I am the one to get blocked? This is absolutely ridiculous! 87.82.116.134 ( talk) 17:13, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
FYI: I am not Phil Essam. I've been a contributor of Wikipedia on and off since April 2008. I was updating the Jesper Olsen page noticed the edits of this user and learned the story of Robert Garside. Email me if you need real information
CanadianLinuxUser (
talk) 18:18, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Moonriddengirl,
This is Preventionbetterthancure, the author of the article about Communities That Care.
Thanks for your note about the copyright issues. If I understand correctly, the copyright issue is because the Blueprints for Violence Prevention website now has a PDF summary of Communities That Care posted on their website. Since I wrote the article, CTC has been found to be effective in an experimental, controlled trial in 24 communities. Blueprints has subsequently reviewed the research and has decided to declare CTC as one of its 'promising' programs. Hence their post. I think if you review the article I wrote about CTC, you won't find exactly the same language between the Wiki article and the Blueprints PDF.
CTC is in the public domain, and CSAP (Center for Substance Abuse Prevention) of the US Govt officially owns all the CTC manuals and materials. They had posted those materials on their website, but have recently revised their website and in so doing (temporarily) lost the link to the CTC materials. The materials can temporarily be found at www.communitiesthatcare.org.
I hope this explanation is sufficient to have you remove the block on the article! It is encouraging to me to see from your comments that there are 20 page views per day, telling me that at least some people out there in communities trying to do something to help their youth are looking for info about CTC.
Please let me know if this explanation is not sufficient, and I will see what I can do. thanks very much, Preventionbetterthancure ( talk) 01:07, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
...so says the editor who uploaded File:Cover SimonSues.jpg and a couple of others. I can't tell if that's true or not, but I did find it interesting that this indicates lots of deletions for copyvio reasons. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 01:14, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
First, let me say sorry your not feeling well and I know that Migraines are an, excuse the pun, real headache and I hope your feeling better soon. Due to the ongoing discussions about the recent bot run I submitted a recommendation regarding the current policy of dealing with copyright violators at the Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) here to modify slightly the wording of the current policy. -- Kumioko ( talk) 15:15, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
{{
cite book}}
: Invalid |ref=harv
(
help); Unknown parameter |isbn10=
ignored (
help)This looks like very light paraphrasing of the sources that it cites, to me. Compare Gana sangh kshatriya#About Gana and Kshatriya Rulers with Singh 2008, pp. 267, for example. What do you think? Does it rise to the level of zapping and starting again? Uncle G ( talk) 17:50, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
There was no single hereditary monarch in Gana. Instead there was a chief known as Ganapati, Ganajyestha, Ganaraja, or Sanghamukhya, and a aristocratic council which met in a hall called the Santhagara. Effective executive power and day-to-day political management must have been in hands of smaller group.
There was no single hereditary monarch in Gana. Instead, there was a chief (known variously as Ganapati, Ganajyestha, Ganaraja, or Sanghamukhya), and an aristocratic council which met in a hall called the santhagara. Effective executive power and day-to-day political management must have been in the hands of a smaller group.
The Ganas greatest assets – governance through discussion - were also their greatest weakness. They were vulnerable to internal dissension, especially when faced with aggressive monarchies. In the Lalitvistara, the future Buddha is described as sitting in heaven, thinking of his impending birth. One of the questions raised is; which family should he born in? The other bodhisattvas and gods discuss and reject the candidature of the Lichchhavis of Vaishali. They say that these people do not speak to each other in proper manner. Do not follow the Dharma, do not preserve the ranks of social status and age, do not become anybodys disciples, and each one thinks,’ I am king, I am king. The Arthshashtra asserts that Sanghas were unassailable and advises the king to win over friendly ones. It suggests that head of sangha should remain self controlled and just towards other members, and should do what is beneficial and agreeable to all others.
The ganas greatest asset – governance through discussion - was also their greatest weakness. They were vulnerable to internal dissension, especially when faced with aggressive monarchies. In the Lalitvistara, the future Buddha is described as sitting in heaven, thinking of his impending birth. One of the questions raised is: Which family should he born in? The other bodhisattvas and gods discuss and reject the candidature of the Lichchhavis of Vaishali. They say that these people do not speak to each other in proper manner, do not follow the dharma, do not preserve the ranks of social status and age, do not become anybodys disciples, and each one thinks, 'I am king, I am king.' The Arthshashtra asserts that sanghas were unassailable and advises the king to win over friendly ones. It suggests that head of a sangha should remain self controlled and just towards other members, and should do what is beneficial and agreeable to all others.
Thank you. It's good to have my opinion confirmed. Uncle G ( talk) 15:17, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
Okay, so I finally tagged an article with a copyvio tag, but it's actually an Afc submission. My thought is, the editors who monitor Afc will take care of the matter? Does it require removing information from the edit history? It may be public domain material, as it is Minnesota government, but the plagiarized portion came from a signed article. I suggested the writer can deal with the plagiarism-only issue, if it is public domain, in some manner, if they choose.
As usual thanks to you for your contributions to wikipedia. (And your talk page stalkers.) -- Kleopatra ( talk) 20:25, 11 December 2010 (UTC)