This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.
All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to clean up.
If contributors have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation, it may be assumed without further evidence that all of their major contributions are copyright violations, and they may be removed indiscriminately in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. However, to avoid collateral damage, efforts should be made when possible to verify infringement before removal.
When every section is completed, please alter the listing for this CCI at Wikipedia:CCI#Open_investigations to include the tag "completed=yes". This will alert a clerk that the listing needs to be archived.
{{CCI-open|Contributor name|Day Month Year|completed=yes}}
{{
subst:CCI|name=Contributor name}}
on the article's talk page.{{
subst:cclean}}
on the article's talk page. The url parameter may be optionally used to indicate source.{{
subst:copyvio}}
, linking to the investigation subpage in the url parameter. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor. Your note on the CCI investigation page serves that purpose.{{subst:copyvio|url=see talk}}
on the article's face and {{
subst:CCId|name=Contributor name}}
on the article's talk page. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor.Extended content
|
---|
Demiurge, good to hear from you again! I hope all is well with you & yours on your side of the pond. Here in Chicago things are going very well, we are enjoying fall color & a spat of summery weather. BTW I was inspired by your user page to add some of your widgets to my user page, including the "Wikipedian since" and "percent article space," so thanks for that. And thank you for your disclosure of your strong disagreement with the cited editor. May I ask, what is your interpretation of the CCI policy, "if you have an on-going dispute with another editor, you should avoid filing a CCI case against that editor, and seek larger input at an appropriate forum"? Do read it as "if you have an on-going dispute with another editor, you should avoid filing a CCI case against that editor, unless disclosed"? Thanks in advance for your reply. Hugh ( talk) 15:58, 25 October 2012 (UTC) May I ask after any efforts on your part to resolve these issues, prior to your CCI request? For example, did you paraphrase a close paraphrase and it was reverted? Did you attempt gf concensus on an article talk page or on the cited editor's talk page or elsewhere? Does the cited editor have a history of copyright violations or recalcitrance with respect to wp policy? Thanks in advance for your reply. Hugh ( talk) 16:11, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Myself, a statement of the form "I strongly disagree with the editor's approach towards WP:BLP" without reference to any specific aspect of WP:BLP, and without reference to any particular content, I don't see myself ever posting anything like that anywhere about anyone. Maybe that's just me. What are your thoughts? Hugh ( talk) 17:06, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Regarding your claim, "none of the material he adds is properly paraphrased," this strikes me as a very strong statement, one that to make in gf might seem to me to require an exhaustive retrieval of thousands of rs. Is that your intention, to contend that ALL of the cited editor's contributions are improperly paraphrased? Is this kind of statement appropriate in your view? Hugh ( talk) 18:02, 25 October 2012 (UTC) What do you think, bro? "none of the material he adds is properly paraphrased"? a bit over the top perhaps? Hugh ( talk) 16:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Hey Hugh, I was in fact planning to reply to that paragraph too, -- but like you said, we're all busy busy. Now, your argument here (overall) is that I should "withdraw" the CCI request and we start again from somewhere. Two things. First, I'm not even sure I'm in a position to do that - the CCI request has been accepted and opened by an independent editor (check the history of this page), and looked at by another who removed (from the CCI) some of your edits that were not problematic, and there's no clear way I can annul that (or those) judgements and just say we're not going to bother. (I remain convinced that a CCI is necessary.)
Second, as far as I can tell, you are making these requests/demands solely at me on this page. (Maybe Tony and a couple other people are watching, but all of them are busy.) What you want is for someone to say, "Hey Demiurge, you got it wrong this time, Hugh has a point, you should've done it differently." I'm not planning to say that myself, and I'm not planning to engage in a back and forth over several days or weeks until one of us wears the other down. The problem is, there are only one or two people watching this page, which means you have a very low chance of someone saying "Hey Demiurge, you got it wrong". If you do feel that I have committed breaches of guidelines in requesting this CCI be opened, and you wish to get comments from outsiders on it, you should open it (feel free to link this discussion) at an appropriate noticeboard. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 21:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
"As far as I can see, none of the material he adds is properly paraphrased." Now that you have reviewed more edits, and now know this statement to be false, will you please delete it from your request? Thanks. Hugh ( talk) 02:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC) Demiurge, I thought of you while reading WP:CRYBLP. Let's review it together and discuss. Thanks. Hugh ( talk) 20:22, 30 November 2012 (UTC) |
Enough of this. It's hard to go through even a smaller CCI when every update is a continued back and forth. I don't want to see any more posts here unless it's someone actually reviewing an article and checking/xing it off. Wizardman 05:23, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
This page has been blanked as a courtesy. |
This page has been removed from search engines' indexes.
All contributors with no history of copyright problems are welcome to contribute to clean up.
If contributors have been shown to have a history of extensive copyright violation, it may be assumed without further evidence that all of their major contributions are copyright violations, and they may be removed indiscriminately in accordance with Wikipedia:Copyright violations. However, to avoid collateral damage, efforts should be made when possible to verify infringement before removal.
When every section is completed, please alter the listing for this CCI at Wikipedia:CCI#Open_investigations to include the tag "completed=yes". This will alert a clerk that the listing needs to be archived.
{{CCI-open|Contributor name|Day Month Year|completed=yes}}
{{
subst:CCI|name=Contributor name}}
on the article's talk page.{{
subst:cclean}}
on the article's talk page. The url parameter may be optionally used to indicate source.{{
subst:copyvio}}
, linking to the investigation subpage in the url parameter. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor. Your note on the CCI investigation page serves that purpose.{{subst:copyvio|url=see talk}}
on the article's face and {{
subst:CCId|name=Contributor name}}
on the article's talk page. List the article as instructed at the copyright problems board, but you do not need to notify the contributor.Extended content
|
---|
Demiurge, good to hear from you again! I hope all is well with you & yours on your side of the pond. Here in Chicago things are going very well, we are enjoying fall color & a spat of summery weather. BTW I was inspired by your user page to add some of your widgets to my user page, including the "Wikipedian since" and "percent article space," so thanks for that. And thank you for your disclosure of your strong disagreement with the cited editor. May I ask, what is your interpretation of the CCI policy, "if you have an on-going dispute with another editor, you should avoid filing a CCI case against that editor, and seek larger input at an appropriate forum"? Do read it as "if you have an on-going dispute with another editor, you should avoid filing a CCI case against that editor, unless disclosed"? Thanks in advance for your reply. Hugh ( talk) 15:58, 25 October 2012 (UTC) May I ask after any efforts on your part to resolve these issues, prior to your CCI request? For example, did you paraphrase a close paraphrase and it was reverted? Did you attempt gf concensus on an article talk page or on the cited editor's talk page or elsewhere? Does the cited editor have a history of copyright violations or recalcitrance with respect to wp policy? Thanks in advance for your reply. Hugh ( talk) 16:11, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Myself, a statement of the form "I strongly disagree with the editor's approach towards WP:BLP" without reference to any specific aspect of WP:BLP, and without reference to any particular content, I don't see myself ever posting anything like that anywhere about anyone. Maybe that's just me. What are your thoughts? Hugh ( talk) 17:06, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
Regarding your claim, "none of the material he adds is properly paraphrased," this strikes me as a very strong statement, one that to make in gf might seem to me to require an exhaustive retrieval of thousands of rs. Is that your intention, to contend that ALL of the cited editor's contributions are improperly paraphrased? Is this kind of statement appropriate in your view? Hugh ( talk) 18:02, 25 October 2012 (UTC) What do you think, bro? "none of the material he adds is properly paraphrased"? a bit over the top perhaps? Hugh ( talk) 16:52, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
Hey Hugh, I was in fact planning to reply to that paragraph too, -- but like you said, we're all busy busy. Now, your argument here (overall) is that I should "withdraw" the CCI request and we start again from somewhere. Two things. First, I'm not even sure I'm in a position to do that - the CCI request has been accepted and opened by an independent editor (check the history of this page), and looked at by another who removed (from the CCI) some of your edits that were not problematic, and there's no clear way I can annul that (or those) judgements and just say we're not going to bother. (I remain convinced that a CCI is necessary.)
Second, as far as I can tell, you are making these requests/demands solely at me on this page. (Maybe Tony and a couple other people are watching, but all of them are busy.) What you want is for someone to say, "Hey Demiurge, you got it wrong this time, Hugh has a point, you should've done it differently." I'm not planning to say that myself, and I'm not planning to engage in a back and forth over several days or weeks until one of us wears the other down. The problem is, there are only one or two people watching this page, which means you have a very low chance of someone saying "Hey Demiurge, you got it wrong". If you do feel that I have committed breaches of guidelines in requesting this CCI be opened, and you wish to get comments from outsiders on it, you should open it (feel free to link this discussion) at an appropriate noticeboard. -- Demiurge1000 ( talk) 21:11, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
"As far as I can see, none of the material he adds is properly paraphrased." Now that you have reviewed more edits, and now know this statement to be false, will you please delete it from your request? Thanks. Hugh ( talk) 02:49, 28 November 2012 (UTC) Demiurge, I thought of you while reading WP:CRYBLP. Let's review it together and discuss. Thanks. Hugh ( talk) 20:22, 30 November 2012 (UTC) |
Enough of this. It's hard to go through even a smaller CCI when every update is a continued back and forth. I don't want to see any more posts here unless it's someone actually reviewing an article and checking/xing it off. Wizardman 05:23, 2 December 2012 (UTC)
This page has been blanked as a courtesy. |