User talk:Diannaa/Archive 55

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Diannaa. 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 50

←

Archive 53

→

Felix Z. Longoria Jr. copyvio? and User:C. W. Gilmore

Sorry to bother you but you did extensive copyvio revdels on Felix Z. Longoria Jr. previously. User:C. W. Gilmore seems to be the source over many years and just recently awoke into a few kerfuffles from being rather dormant. This edit claims to be curative and adds a source but is obviously not curative when the source was word-for-word identical. It missed your previous cleanup as it would have been hard to spot without the source. Unfortunately, I've been unable to track its origination as the rev dels spanned years. This diff[1] is all I can see so I can't see who inserted the cut/paste from Together we served or who added the "citation needed" tag in 2016. User:C. W. Gilmore replaced a trivial amount of words and seemed to know they came from TWS. Not sure whether this is an isolated minor vio or long term editor issue since I can't see the revdels. --DHeyward (talk) 06:01, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I recall that the section was marked as citation needed, so I found a source and recall changing 15 days to 2weeks. I did not post original section, I just found a source and changed a couple of words. What is wrong? I don't quite understand.

Does that section need to be re-written, if so, I could try to do it, but I didn't write the original. Please clarify, thanksC. W. Gilmore (talk) 06:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I've worked on this page off and on for years as my mother was the last owner of the funeral home before it was tourn down and my grandfather was Felix's best friend, he's even mentioned in the book. I come back to this every few years to check on it and fix what I can. Sorry but I'm not the best editor or that great with computers.C. W. Gilmore (talk) 06:52, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

It does not appear to be the case of just finding a source. You found "THE source" from which it was lifted verbatim. You then changed it in a trivial way which is still afoul of copyvio. You noted that your edit was to fix the copyright and add a source. I cannot tell if you added any copyrighted material so Diannaa will have to address that. Also, I don't know if it needs more revdels. I cannot say you did anything wrong without being able to see the history which is why I brought it here. Diannaa has been the admin cleaning up the copyvio's and is the person that can assess who/what/when/how. Finding a source that showed the copyright infringement is a good thing but the copyvio needs to be properly fixed and I am not able to determine if it needs to be suppressed. (N.B. I formatted your comment to remove leading space/box.) --DHeyward (talk) 07:05, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the help and I had no idea about the copyright thing as I said I only found a source and changed it to 2 weeks because that's what my book said. Please tell me if you find anything else, I can try to re-write any section as I the book to reference and I can look up other sources. I figured that if the section was on here, then someone had checked it. Again, please let me know if other section have problems. ThanksC. W. Gilmore (talk) 07:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I think I got it re-written so it passed copyright review. Please check it out and tell me if it is OK. Also let me know if you see anything else that is an issue. This page has personal meaning to me and I want to see it in good shape. ThanksC. W. Gilmore (talk) 10:16, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

@C. W. Gilmore: I get the impression that you thought that Wikipedia is cobbled together by copying and pasting material from around the Web. It's not. The articles are original material written by Wikipedians using sources such as books, magazines, and news reports. Copying directly from sources is a copyright violation, and we don't permit it. There is overlap with here but some of that material we have had since 2008 so I have to assume that page is a Wikipedia mirror (which means they copied from us rather than the other way around). I am going to remove a bit regardless as it duplicates the content in the following paragraph, and since you had an incorrect impression of copyright law and how it applies to Wikipedia when you added it back in 2011, I have to assume you copied it from somewhere, though I can't prove it. The current version of the article is okay from a copyright point of view in my opinion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:33, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I got it from state records, local articles and national news, but I'm sorry that I don't remember too much from then, except that the way listed references was completely incorrect as I recall when I came back to the page around 2014(?), many of the resources were missing or dead links. Anyway, thank you for all the help and I will not make the same mistakes again. I'm still not the best at this, but I can learn, thanks again. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 14:42, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I hope it is OK, I fixed the links to that paragraph and added sources.[2] You deleted it, I think for not being sourced, but will this work now? If not, then please delete it and tell me what needs to be fixed on the Talk page so I can do it correctly. ThanksC. W. Gilmore (talk) 15:11, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

It looks okay from a copyright point of view, but needs a bit of smoothing out as the wife and child are mentioned again in the next paragraph and it kinda duplicates the info provided there. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:24, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks again and will work on it.C. W. Gilmore (talk) 23:06, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Please reverse the deletion of the material I added to wikipedia and remove the warnings on my talk page

Hello, in an extremely aggressive manner, Wikipedia:Civility you threatened to block me from wikipedia, (see below) based on your personal interpenetration of Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Quotations and WP:NFCCEG.

Please give me rational for this personal interpretation of fair use and wikipedia guidelines. Please reverse the deletion of the material I added to Wikipedia and remove the warnings on my talk page.

I would like to work with you civilly to build an encyclopedia.

Thank you in advance. Moscowamerican (talk) 09:12, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Your posting on my page.

== October 2017 == Your addition to The Forsaken: An American Tragedy in Stalin’s Russia has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:45, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

I also found copyvio on Head transplant. This is your final warning. Further copyright violations will result in you being blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:14, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Moscowamerican (talk) 09:15, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Moscowamerican. On Head transplant, I found copyright violations from http://discovermagazine.com/1996/jan/headless658 and http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19971021&slug=2567488. Neither of these was framed as a quotation, so it wasn't a case of fair use, but a copyright violation. While I was there I removed a lot of quotations, reducing the size of the article by about half. That's an excessive amount of quotations. Wikipedia articles should for the most part be written in your own words. Likewise, on the article The Forsaken: An American Tragedy in Stalin’s Russia I found material copied from https://www.spectator.co.uk/2008/07/deluded-and-abandoned/ and again the material was not framed as a quotation. I also found copyright violations on the article The Interloper: Lee Harvey Oswald Inside the Soviet Union back in June 2016.

Content you add to this wiki should be written in your own words. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Purdue or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I was asked to look at this. Diannea, you're right of course, about the copyvio. I know there are multiple valid approaches for dealing with this sort of problem, but if it just needed quotation marks, perhaps that could have been added instead or using rev del. Similarly, where the problem was that the quotations were too long. DGG ( talk ) 01:09, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

DGG, this sort of thing does NOT "just need quotes". It needs to be removed and revdel'd. Primefac (talk) 02:01, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Primefac do you realize that in the link you just gave, we are dealing with with less than one whole sentence? With 23 words in scattered phrases? I think it poor judgment among the available remedies. Policy permits us a whole range of options, The revdel policy says "Blatant copyright violations " not all copyright violations. (I have not yet lookedatthe other violations mentioned.) DGG ( talk ) 07:25, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

So nice to see you didn't actually check the rest, because this is a full paragraph of copyvio, as is this. Yes, the first link was heavily paraphrased, and it could have been rewritten, but implying that Diannaa is in the wrong solely because someone complained is a bit questionable (i.e. it looks like you're commenting based solely on what Moscowamerican told you). I know I don't see every edit she's ever made, but in nine months as an admin I have declined her G12s or RD1s maybe thrice, and I see her name pop up almost every day. If you're going to offer to look into something, at the very least you could, you know, look. Primefac (talk) 11:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

(edit conflict)DGG, the editor added a 63-word paragraph (not scattered, an entire paragraph) to The Forsaken: An American Tragedy in Stalin’s Russia copied from The Spectator, and on the same day added a 128-word paragraph (not scattered, an entire paragraph) from Discover magazine and a 35-word paragraph (not scattered, an entire paragraph) copied from the Seattle Times to the article Head transplant. I already warned him about copyvio in June of last year. I don't think enabling the user to proceed as if nothing is wrong is the right approach here. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:56, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I can understand the need to give a serious warning after all of this, and I know that I give very few blocks or rev dels compared to most admins. I think we need a discussion of when just deletion is appropriate and when rev del. I remember there used to be one, but I cannot locate it, and perhaps the practice changed when rev del became available to admins. DGG ( talk ) 00:48, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Copypatrol restart

I assume something went wrong with Copypatrol. It was not available a couple times I checked this morning and is now, but many of the entries on the top of the page from 28 October and earlier, some of which you have already handled. I'm marking those items as page fixed or no action needed as the case may be but that also means I'm getting credit for it rather than you.

I can pause and let you do it if credit's important to you. --S Philbrick (Talk) 17:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I dropped a note on the feedback page, and heard back that there's a hardware problem.--S Philbrick (Talk) 19:01, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Sphilbrick. Cases from October 31 (there were 28 unresolved items) are missing from the current version of the page. I have a copy open in a tab. I will work from that so that those items get dealt with. Items from the current version of the page were all resolved. I will have a look at them real quick as there's only fourteen of them. Thanks for letting me know what's going on. P.S. It doesn't matter to me who gets credit. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:55, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

@Sphilbrick: Update: a new case has just posted on the board so it looks like we are rolling again. I will continue to work on the October 31 cases that I have saved from yesterday — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:26, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

I see that we are rolling again. I'll be out of town tomorrow, so will pick up tomorrow night or Friday.--S Philbrick (Talk) 01:46, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. Things are pretty caught up right now. Enjoy your day away from wiki. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:58, 2 November 2017 (UTC) Or don't enjoy, if you'll be out of town for a root canal or to testify before the House Committee ;) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:50, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Thankfully, neither a root canal nor House testimony, but an enjoyable 12 mile hike on the Appalachian Trail.--S Philbrick (Talk) 22:53, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Like — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:44, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Somewhat embarassing

Diannaa, I always interact with you from the opposite ends of G12/revdel templates, and thus I don't get to tell you how much I appreciate the work you do with copyvios. Thanks. One of these days I'll get on the CV patrol, but until then I guess I'll just stick to finding 'em in drafts and patrolling the RD1/G12 cats. Primefac (talk) 02:03, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the feedback and for the many ways you help this wiki. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:59, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Hitler article - Congratulations !

As I was about to ask you something, instead I noticed your Million Award for the Adolf Hitler article. As I had a minor go there once, I know that was no easy task. Even in which nation he was born in appeared to be a huge difficulty, so I though it just would be a waste of time. So Congratulations for that reward, well done ! I've read it , but will read it more thoroughly on a paper soon (I'm currently "out of printers, not just ink or toner" , have to visit a friend). But it looks splendid ! I acknowledge you to the best editor I ever have encountered at Wikipedia, for what that may be worth.

A somewhat related matter Battle of Moscow has gone through all examinations for a Featured article. Still, I added this to its lead end (without referring to any source even) "It was a major setback for the Germans, the end of the idea of a fast German victory in the USSR. Field Marshal Walther von Brauchitsch was excused as commander of OKH, instead Hitler appointed himself as Germany's supreme military commander as well." - several days ago now. How could it possibly get a Featured status, as it fails to draw the obvious and well-known conclusion I wrote ? (sources could be Shirer, Salmaggi & Pallavisini, Churchill, RR Palmer, Bullock, etc, etc just about any author who has written something about this battle). I'm a bit keen to know whether you too can see a problem with the status of that article, or not. Boeing720 (talk) 20:07, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the positive feedback. Battle of Moscow was promoted to Featured Article back in 2006, when standards were not as high, so it is likely overdue for a reassessment. The main contributors to the page are no longer active. I have not participated in the Featured Article process, so I am not in a position to assess whether or not this article meets the modern FA standards. The place to go is WP:FAR if you want to nominate it for review. Or you could work on it yourself if you have access to the relevant source material. Drawing conclusions is not something we as Wikipedia editors should be doing; conclusions should be those provided by the sources, not us. so don't add it unless you can source it, even if you think it's common knowledge. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry if I was that unclear with the second (and minor) part. It was most certainly not any kind of criticism related to you. Not at all. It was meant as a compare, at least I come to think of it, as I truly wished to congratulate you for that effort. It was a mess when I tried there, as I wrote. Huge discussions of in which nation he was born in (Austria - no Germany ! etc and as I meant he was born in Austria-Hungary , this was commented as "now we have three opinions/alternatives"!!!)

"Featured" is kind of 'above' "Good Reading" isn't it ? And if so, the Hitler article ought to be given the higher status compared to Battle of Moscow. That's why I asked for your opinion. And my congratulation was honest and sinceare. I have no knowledge about Wikipedia-historical FA-rule changes.

Sources, material ? With exception of Churchill x 6 volumes, I have read all those, and have them at home, yes. And a dozen or more of other WW2 related books, some in English. (And I have had access to Churchills war-encyclopedia earlier) My printing/edition of Shirer's "Rise and Fall..." contain four parts, each part is re-numbered. But the chapters are not. So - Shirer, chapter 24 (beginning at p.269 of part III) at p.282/III (around 13 pages later):
"Misslyckandet var ännu större, vilket Halder insåg - i varje fall senare när han skrev 'Illusionen om den tyska arméns oövervinnerlighet har brustit.'" .... "Därför blev den 6:e december 1941 en ny vändpunkt, en av de allra viktigaste i Tredje Rikets historia. Hitlers bana hade nått kulmen."

Or in English (re-translated, may differ from the original)

"The failure was even greater, which Halder realised - at least later when he wrote 'The illusion of the German army's invincibility has ruptured/fallen'"..."Hence the 6:th December 1941 became a new turning point, one of the most important in the history of the Third Reich. Hitler's track/path had reached its culmination"

I'm sorry to have used long quotes But what to do ? (so I leave von Brauchitsch out here) I do not make own conclusions, I just thought a featured article should "cover it all" including the strategic significance and consecuences. I have no desire to destroy for other's (the "featured" star), but I can certainly make an attempt of "improving through secondary sources", as you also suggested. My point was, the fact that no one has(had?) objected, I took as the "featured-editors" (<-expression only) realised there was an error, given its status. (When I once made an edit in an other featured article (The Adventures of Tintin), I was immediately alerted by "featured-editors" - like "please be careful, this is a featured article and we would like it to stay that way". Very polite, and it was about those albums which are connected, and I had put my contribution below the wrong headline, as I remember. So I (unknowing of what you now have told me) expected someone to alert me this time as well, especially as I didn't use a source there and then. Like a test. And as they didn't... Am I making any sense ? I truly meant to congratulate you. Boeing720 (talk) 02:00, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Battle of Moscow appear's to be (mainly) written from a Russian perspective, I must get my sourced material in somewhere. Or possibly add the refs in the lead. (There is at least one already) I guess some Russian, perhaps, have not though of what their success did to Hitler's planning. To me, it looks alright from all other perspectives. Sorry for the long text above (and the fish ?). I just felt misunderstood. And please do not take critics against any article, as personal. Especially as you haven't had anything to do with that article. Please. Boeing720 (talk) 07:13, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Appologies

Diannaa, I know you have much things you prefer to do here, than talk to me. I also know you receive very many thanks, barnstars, congratulations and awards most of the time. And all very well earned. To just say "thanks for your splendid efforts and time", I just felt wouldn't be that much point in. My mind thought like "if there must be a point of my sincere congratulation, I as some kind of lower hobby ("hobbyistish") Wikipedian , I really must try to explain it as good as I can".
You have other similar awards, but I had indeed experience of the Hitler Article. And hence I knew that task was indeed a difficult one. And in the middle of my thoughts I just thought that a compare possibly could make my congratulation even better, as I really wanted my congratulation to be appreciated. Not just "perhaps yet another one".
My actual matter was to ask you of your opinion on Popular Historical Magazines if/how they can be used as souces.(signed vs unsigned articles), as I've obtained a whole bunch of such magazines after my dad - but I forgot about them, due to my notice of that specific award. I had so to speak "no plan" to congratulate you. But due to my memories of my minor effort to that article, I suddenly thought it was an appropriate time to do so.
Then thought a compare would be in order, and sadly I added a minor question, it just "happened", can't explain. And obviously I misunderstood your reply. I'm not up to your Wikipedian skill and level, but I have read a whole lot of History. Not at university level, but ever since I was around 11-12. A comics series "for adults" about WW2. And especially after my (unvolonary) military service, I graduadly read more. (and backwards, from WW2 to WW1 and I'm very interested in the period 1779-1918). Anyways I Suddenly felt accused, and acted as I usually do when I get a such feeling which I find (in my own mind) as unfair. But I now realize that was not your intention. I guess you sooner meant Wikipedian matters, not my knowledge. I'm sorry. You have always been very helpful and friendly to me before, and I have many other things to thank you for. I'm really poor when it comes to like "how to change an articles name" and all such techical matters. I'm really so sorry for this behavior. (I know very little about orchids, but I have had Uaru in my largest aquarium during ten years, I like them) Someting went wrong here, and it was all my own fault. I will not disturb you in the future. But Could you please accept my appologies ? Boeing720 (talk) 12:57, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Extensive copyright infringement

It seems like take an interest in copyright infringement, therefore you might be interested in what appears to be massive copyright infringement and what might be done about it. I noticed some time ago that content from many articles on places in Singapore were copied verbatim from a book Singapore's 100 Historic Places. It appears to have been added by an editor who is no longer active - [3], and his plagiarism had gone unnoticed for many years and in fact had collected numerous barnstars. It would seem that he copied a large part of the book spread over numerous articles. (I have that book to check against the content of those articles, therefore I can confirm that his edits on the articles I checked, if not all his edits, were copied.) I marked just some of those pages, posted a notice on the WikiProject Singapore - [4], but so far little has been done on those marked. I have rewritten some of the articles that contained texts from the book (they are articles on the more important places), although there seem little interest from other editors in rewriting others. As I do not have the time to check all his edits or rewrite them, and I'm not really sure what to do with them (mass deletion?), so I thought I'd let you know as you might have a better idea on what to do. Thanks. Hzh (talk) 14:26, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Hzh. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I am also in no position to check all 38,000 edits by this user, and suggest you request a case be opened at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations. That page is not as active as it used to be, but hopefully someone will make the time to investigate the case. In the meantime, if you could please remove the copyright violations that you have discovered so far (or nominate the articles for deletion if they're copyvio top to bottom), I would appreciate it. Thanks again. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:47, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

(tps) Sounds like a reverse copyvio if that's the case, actually. The user's last mainspace edit was October 2007. The book was published April 2008. Wizardman 17:00, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Wizardman. That's a relief. :) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:02, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Actually no. My copy of the book was first published in 2002. Hzh (talk) 17:13, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Then it's back to my first suggestion unfortunately. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:16, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Michael Oliver (referee)

Hi there, I am wondering if you can change the visibility of this revision because it contains "purely disruptive material". Iggy (talk) 16:33, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

My opinion is that this does not qualify for revision deletion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:46, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Re: Copyright on Speed of light

Dear Diannaa

I have reformulated my edit about the constancy of the speed of light.

I hope, it is now sufficiently different such that it does not violate copyright anymore.

Thx :)

Darkch2 (talk) 16:50, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

While the bot did not flag this version as copyvio, it is still extremely similar, presenting the same ideas in the same order using almost identical wording. Also, editors have twice removed your addition for reasons other than copyright. So no, not okay. SOrry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Re:Copying within Wikipedia requires proper attribution

Thank you for bringing this to my attention, I didn’t realize you couldn’t do this and I feel bad about that. I linked the Main Downtown St. Catharines article to the St. Catharines article and thought that it was normal to have some copied content between the two. I will read the article you sent me to be better informed for next time.

Unfortunately, your deletion removed some of my own work as well. I may now have to go back and try to figure out what was my work and what was the work copied from the St. Catharines article. I realize you probably didn’t do this on purpose or with negative intent, but I’m a bit dismayed that the long amount of volunteer time I spent trying to improve the article was deleted in one fell swoop. Maybe there was a better way to do this, or there could be an improved way to do this next time, such as slapping a warning on the article which the writer would quickly see and edit. I created and continue to work on this article since 2006, over 11 years ago! So positive intent can be assumed on my part, I will try to be more careful next time. Hopefully you will as well. Trappy (talk) 21:39, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Trappy: It's not that you can't do it; it's that I didn't think copying all that material was appropriate or helpful. Your addition is still available in the page history, and you could revert my edit if you wish. It was not an administrator action but an editorial choice. If you want to compare pages, you can do that via Special:ComparePages, which allows you to plug in two articles and compare any two revisions of those pages, like I did here. Doing so reveals what parts the two articles did not have in common at the time you added the History section. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:07, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Alleged copyright infringement

Thank you Dianna for reaching out. I did not copy the Magos Herrera bio as you suggested. I used it as a roadmap to find sources to tell the encyclopedic story. I just reread the wiki and did not see what you removed. So I’m hoping all is well. If not, please get in touch and I"ll fix the page further. EllenZoe (talk) 21:52, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Please don't add copyright content to this wiki, not even temporarily for editing. Please do your amendments before you save the page, or use an external editor. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:09, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Billion (company)

Hello Diannaa, the subject article was copied entirely from this source. I have removed it from the text, but could you scour the history to remove any remaining trace? I will look for other sources and likely nominate for AfD. Thanks, Loopy30 (talk) 12:52, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. I also warned the user about copyvio and conflict of interest. Thank you for letting me know about this problem. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:00, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, the persistent SPA user (Chiayich) added it back in again today though. Loopy30 (talk) 12:02, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

That was fast! You were in there before I could find the {{subst:uw-copyrightblock}} warning template and post it to their talk page. 'Cheers, Loopy30 (talk) 12:10, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Since he's likely a paid editor and has already received one warning, I have blocked the user and will watch-list the article for a while in case he returns under a different username. Thanks for letting me know. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:12, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Possible whitelist

I'm thinking about proposing a whitelist for Rosiestep. Do you have an opinion? I see her name every couple of days or so, always involving material in the public domain. For example, Emma_B._Alrich.

(If you concur, I have forgotten how we add someone to the white list.)--S Philbrick (Talk) 13:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Rosiestep is already on the whitelist. For some reason the bot misses these from time to time. Here is a link to the whitelist: User:EranBot/Copyright/User whitelist. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:47, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I was slightly surprised when I thought she wasn't already on it.--S Philbrick (Talk) 15:04, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Tech News: 2017-45

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Recent changes

You will no longer see the patrol log on Special:Log unless you specifically select it. [5]

Changes later this week

The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey begins on 6 November. You can post proposals from 19:00 UTC and until November 19.
The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 November. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 November. It will be on all wikis from 9 November (calendar).

Meetings

You can join the technical advice meeting on IRC. During the meeting, volunteer developers can ask for advice. The meeting will be on 8 November at 16:00 (UTC). See how to join.

Future changes

URLs that link to sections on Wikimedia wikis with non-Latin scripts have looked like this: https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Википедия#.D0.98.D1.81.D1.82.D0.BE.D1.80.D0.B8.D1.8F instead of https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Википедия#История. This will soon be fixed. Old links will still work. [6][7]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

18:45, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

Copypasted content in Water damage - revdel needed?

Hello Diannaa, this edit [8] introduced largely copypasted content from the source. A Google search for "Regulated, Hazardous Materials and Mold: If a regulated" leads to a published copy of the text at [9]. But I am not entirely sure, if such regulations published by the Institute of Inspection Cleaning and Restoration Certification might be PD for some US-specific legal reason (the print version costs $125 on the organization's site). Could you take a look please when you got a bit of time, and revdel these 2 edits if needed? Thank you - as always :) - for your help. GermanJoe (talk) 20:43, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

The user did not specify that this was a quotation so I have gone ahead with revision deletion. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:48, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Question on revdel of copy-pasted content

Hello Diannaa: I'm directing this question to you because I have seen your work on cleaning up copyright violations, and you have previously done so at the article Mulund College of Commerce. The article came up in Recent Changes, and it was originally a big mess of promotional content. I removed some content that I found to be directly copied from the college's website, and rewrote the article as a straightforward stub. However, when I went to look at when this copyvio was introduced, it goes back to the first version of the article created in 30 August 2016. I understand that revdel is used to redact blatant copyright violations, but in this case wouldn't that mean redacting the article's entire revision history? I'm interested to find out what would be appropriate in this situation, and hope you can shed some light. Thank you! Kbseah (talk) 00:24, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Kbseah. I have gone ahead with the revision deletion. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:49, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Kbseah (talk) 07:06, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Elvis Presley

Hello Diannaa, I know you deal with Copyrighted text in articles, I'm hoping you have a look at Elvis Presley article, unless I'm reading Earwig's Copyvio Detector incorrectly. - FlightTime (open channel) 16:12, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

With an article that's been here a while, there's going to be Wikipedia mirrors galore so a bit of digging is required. The first webpage listed, http://www.southernmuseumofmusic.com/Spotlight/00-P/Elvis-Presley.htm, shows a creation date of 2016-11-14 according to this tool so it is a Wikipedia mirror. http://army-of-lovers.com/army-of-lovers-king-midas-1996.html is an obvious Wikipedia mirror; the footnotes are a giveaway. The NY Times is quotations, as is the NPS website. It looks like the page is okay. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:45, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Re: Inside Secure

Hi Diannaa Thank you so much for reviewing my article on "Inside Secure". I understand you had some finding and made some corrections. The diff does not work so I can't see what you actually did and can't comment on that, but besides that the article seems to keep its original structure so I am very happy with that. What are the next steps? Is there anything I should do? Also, can you guide me how do I get to upload the logo? (still missing at the upper right corner)

Many thanks

Ron Ronkeidar (talk) 18:21, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Ronkeidar. I did not review your draft; all I did was remove the copyright violations. Your draft is in the queue to be reviewed, but there are 1946 pending submissions awaiting review, so it could be quite a while. We don't accept non-free content in draft space, so you will have to wait and upload the logo once the draft is accepted for publication. There's a link "Upload file" in the menu on the left of your screen that will lead you to a page that will guide you through the process of uploading the logo. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:33, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

All laws were properly cited in my contributions.

I think all of the laws I cited in my contributions were properly cited. As per the Philippine Legal Citation Manual, the proper format is: (Name of the law), (Section), (Article) (paragraph). For example: "1987 Philippine Constitution, Section 1, Article III". Please feel free to suggest anything for the betterment of these contributions. TheLawKage (talk) 01:29, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

You need to make it clearer that these are quotations and not prose that you wrote yourself. The {{PD-notice}} template is one way to do this. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:14, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

पाटलिपुत्र: Removing proper links, and replacing them with links to copyright infringing websites

Hi, Per WP:Copyvio policy and WP:ELNEVER, "Copyright infringing material should also not be linked to" and "material that violates the copyrights of others per contributors' rights and obligations should not be linked, whether in an external-links section or in a citation." The User:पाटलिपुत्र have been removing google books url and linking to websites that host download of books under copyright. For example here and here. I have not looked how deep this problem is and how many articles have been affected by this editor. Ms Sarah Welch (talk) 20:33, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, did not know that rule (but are these seemingly reputable sites hosting pirated copies?). As far as I know I only linked 2-3 books (the Spinks ones) on the Ajanta Caves page. Cheers पाटलिपुत्र (talk) 20:39, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Copyright issues

I know you do the lion's share of the copyright work (and probably have not been thanked adequately enough), but this is just a heads up that starting tomorrow I'm going to be on the road for all but a few hours until 30 November. While I will bring a laptop with me, I have noticed that it's easy to do copyright work with two monitors so I won't have that, plus I will be spending most of my day away from a computer. (I know some people try to edit on the phone but I'm not even going to try.)--S Philbrick (Talk) 23:01, 9 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the alert, and thanks for all the work on this wiki as well. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 10:44, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Brookline College

Hi, I noticed what you did today with this article. It's been on my watchlist for a year since I removed a big piece of it that didn't belong. There is a long history of COI editing here and I wouldn't be surprised if more advertorial info is eventually added back. Thanks for this cleanup. MB 23:03, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

I think I'll add it to my watch-list for a while. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:51, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Swami Samarth

Just noticed you have removed content recently added due to copyright issue claiming I took it from some travel website. If would see the citation link provided, it has been taken from a book on google books. Isn’t that allowed considering many other Wikipedia articles have citations from google books?

Just sad to see you remove it all get suddenly deleted after working on fixing the article for so long. I have never visited that website link you provided in the removal description. ShotgunMavericks ❯❯❯ 🕊✍🏻

@ShotgunMavericks: The content actually appears at multiple places online and in at least two books, according to a Google search. Regardless of your source, it's not okay to add copyright material to this website. Everything you add here needs to be written in your own words please. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:10, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Animal Sentience (journal)

Hi Diannaa, the verbatim self-description of the journal has now been replaced by my paraphrase. Thanks. --User:Harnad 17:36, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Courtesy notification: ANI mention

You probably saw the mention of your name, but I mentioned an administrative action you took at WP:ANI#Violation of "3 revert rule" and repeated reverting of valid edits by User:Darkness Shines. —C.Fred (talk) 22:31, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Zenith Solar

Hi Diannaa, this is Roy Segev and Im using user name roysegev, and i was modifying the item of zenithsolar. I just wanted to let you know, that I am the founder of Zenithsolar, and also the owner of company's web site , I was the original author of all the items I have added this morning, so as the mater of fact if those wording exists somewhere they are infringing my copywrite. Please un-do your deletions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roysegev (talk • contribs) 17:45, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in working on wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:03, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

No worries

I'm a fella, thanks for your comments at ANI Darkness Shines (talk) 23:43, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

Kadava Patidar

Hi Diannaa, this may need some rev/deleting when time permits. Thank you, as always. 2601:188:180:11F0:F11B:E449:55C1:762E (talk) 17:53, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. For what it's worth, {{revdel}} used on the page works too. Primefac (talk) 18:05, 14 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Thank you, Primefac. 2601:188:180:11F0:F11B:E449:55C1:762E (talk) 18:50, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

I was at the dentist! Thanks for the help. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:00, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Eva Braun

D - you know photo licensing well. Please check the image added to this article: Evabraunbyhitler. Claims to be a sketch by Hitler, but the source seems questionable and there is no way to authenticate it. Kierzek (talk) 18:31, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

I have nominated all four of his uploads for deletion, as there's no evidence that they are released under the stated licenses. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, Kierzek (talk) 00:24, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

RE: Copyright Problem on HM Prison Altcourse.

Thanks for your edit an suggestion, Diannaa.

I have reviewed and rewritten the section The prison wings. I hope you find it satisfactory.

Thanks for spending the time helping me.

UmneyIan (talk) 19:59, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

The current version looks okay from a copyright point of view. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Parga

Current version looks okay. I have done some revision deletion. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your tireless work Dianna. Take care. Dr. K. 15:13, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Help required for adding copyright license tag for an image

I uploaded this image https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Bodies_of_Bangali_students_of_Dhaka_University%27s_Iqbal_Hall_(now_Shaheed_Sergeant_Zahurul_Haq_Hall)_killed_during_the_Operation_Searchlight_on_March_25,_1971_were_kept_lying_in_front_of_the_dormitory_the_next_day.jpeg to Wikipedia and provided copyright information as follows-

Author: Sabbir Hossain

Details: "The photo is archived in Bangladesh "Muktijuddho e-Archive Trust" (Bangladesh Liberation War e-Archive Trust): http://www.liberationwarbangladesh.org/2017/01/71-photo-archive.html All the photos are available here in Flicker: https://www.flickr.com/photos/liberationwarbangladesh/ The website states as at least 5000 high quality photos of 1971 Bangladesh Liberation War collected by the information collector of Bangladesh liberation war Sabbir Hossain and captured by national and foreign photographers are freely published for people. The website states that the images are free for anyone for non-commercial used, but it's not allowed to used the images for commercial purposes. Bangladeshi English-language daily newspaper "Dhaka Tribune" published this image from "Muktijuddho e-Archive Trust" in their news post: http://www.dhakatribune.com/bangladesh/2017/03/25/operation-searchlight-genocide-unleashed/"

Now I have been asked to add copyright license tag, but I don't know how exactly to add it. If it's easy enough, based on the above information, tell me how. Or you can add the copyright license tag for the image based on the above information and I will check the source codes of the page afterwords to check what codes you used for adding copyright license tag. Idel800 (talk) 08:13, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry but images that are not allowed for commercial purposes are not permitted on this wiki. It's not a compatible license, since our license permits all uses, including commercial uses. So we won't be able to host that photo and I have deleted it. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:58, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Edit info & removal - WWII MoH Pfc. Joe E. Mann

User Diannaa... regarding Copyright / confirmation / etc, about Joe M. i do not agree your removals. I have been working 1:1 closely together last couple of weeks with the descendants of the M. family and their own archives to add the missing and incorrect data here on Wiki here. Please adjust jour removals that I've been editing together with the M. family.

Also your remark about his MoH removal ??? It's public on all GOV sites... you must be kidding to remove his additonal info I've postod on the MoH Wiki site. Joe E. Mann is just 1 of the 2... 101st AB members in WWII that got a MoH.

So please remove your adjustments in my additional and complete edits about Joe M. and restore these edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FriFra (talk • contribs) 13:23, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

List of Medal of Honor recipients for World War II. The citation awarded to Mann is quoted in full on the Wikipedia page. The only thing that was removed was a snippet of content copied from http://www.ww2marketgarden.com/usmedalcitations.html or elsewhere online. I won't be restoring that. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:33, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia Systems development life cycle Phase Descriptions

Many thanks for bringing to my attention the copyright problem that you sent me a message about. I am more than happy to rewrite these sections so that copyright is not violated, but need a little help to understand what I need to do. May I please, therefore, ask if you would provide an example of what is acceptable using one of the objectives or activities I have written, many thanks. I will then rewrite the remaining sections using this as a form of template.

Richard Gale (talk) 15:06, 17 November 2017 (UTC)Richard Gale.

Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Purdue or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:18, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks for your input, Diannaa. The three phases on the Artice page have been rewritten, as have all five phases on the Talk page. Having been requested by Walter to post all phases on Talk page, I now await his approval for the remaining two phases before I post them on the Article page.

Richard Gale (talk) 12:33, 18 November 2017 (UTC)Richard Gale.

I have removed some of your proposed edit, as it is copied from https://babokpage.wordpress.com/com/ and https://babokpage.wordpress.com/reqan/. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:45, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing my rewrites. I will make another effort on the lines you removed later today and will advise through this forum when they have been posted.

Richard Gale (talk) 06:55, 19 November 2017 (UTC)Richard Gale.

As the rewritten sections have been posted on the Talk page, may I please ask if you would review them to make sure you are happy with them, thanks. If you are happy with them, I will then post them on the Article page.

Richard Gale (talk) 09:23, 19 November 2017 (UTC)Richard Gale.

The re-write looks okay from a copyright point of view, but I will have to leave the decision as to whether the material is suitable for inclusion to people who know more about the topic. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:38, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Many thanks for reviewing the re-write and for giving your views as to it's applicabillity. As I advised in the beginning of my introduction on the subject matter, the International Institute of Business Analysis is the certification body for those business analysts wishing to become certified in their profession, so I personally believe the use the BABOK as a reference point in the process of collecting and documenting requirements for developing a system is appropriate, which I why I invested quite a bit of my time over the past week for the benefit of others in the project community. Also, I am, by profession, a Project Manager of 21 years experience and I can vouch for the fact that this is the way that business analysts collected and documented the requirements in the projects I delivered.

Richard Gale (talk) 13:17, 19 November 2017 (UTC)Richard Gale.

That's a discussion you will have to undertake with the other people interested in editing the page. My only reason for visiting it was to clean up the copyright violations, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:44, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Politics of Switzerland

Hallo! Can you recover the history? The author allow the use now [10]. Best regards,--Garçongrande (talk) 22:27, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately I cannot, as the CC BY-SA 4.0 license is not considered a compatible license for use on this wiki. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:13, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

I see, what a pity. In all the wikipedia languages also? Do you know if wikipedia will move to CC BY SA 4 and if so, when?--Garçongrande (talk) 08:48, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't know the answers to those questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:16, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Clogau Gold Mine

Hi Dianna. There is a copyvio at that article, introduced by an IP, here – subject to the usual disclaimers. Thank you again. Dr. K. 19:20, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Revision deletion complete. Thank you for reporting this. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:39, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

You are very welcome. Thank you also Dianna. Dr. K. 20:55, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Templating the regulars

A little slice of advice - it's best to avoid templating regular, prolific users. It can be easily misinterpreted as incivility. However, as far as the draft thing goes, I don't believe you were intending to be rude in any manner. Dark Knight 2149 21:17, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

I apologise for leaving you a templated notice. By the way, I saw your edit summaries here and here, which make me wonder if you understand what attribution is or why we have to do it. Attribution is legally required under the terms of our CC-by-SA license any time you copy content from one place in the encyclopedia to another, including to draft space. Attribution is required even if you only use some of the material, and even if you intend to edit it or remove it later. here is a link to the copyvio report showing the overlap between the source article and the draft. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:42, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

I added a "Main article" template as a source for attribution. The thought honestly hadn't crossed my mind because the section will most likely be removed from the franchise article when it no longer constitutes "Future". My apologies for that. I rarely repeat major mistakes like this a second time. Dark Knight 2149 22:12, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

The way we are supposed to do it is via the edit summary. The edit summary is mandatory; any related templates are optional. Please see WP:Copying within Wikipedia for the full legalese. Regards, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:16, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Noted. Dark Knight 2149 22:21, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Add the Attribution section to the talk section of both the giving and receiving articles. "Text and references copied from link1 to link2 See former article page history for a list of contributors." 22:24, 18 November 2017 (UTC) Mistakes happen. Forgot to sign. 7&6=thirteen (☎) 22:36, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

I added it to Draft talk:Halloween (2018 film). Dark Knight 2149 02:44, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Copyright advice

Hello, Diannaa. If possible, I'd like to ask you for advice regarding a copyright issue. Does it constitute a copyright violation to list all the chapters of a book in the way that they appear on a contents page of that book, for example? I've long assumed that it does, but I'd like confirmation on whether that is correct or not, or specifically in what situations it applies. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:04, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

My opinion is that if it's clearly stated as a list of chapters, that makes it obvious that it's a quotation, and short quotations are okay, not a copyvio. I don't think it's something we normally do, but I can't find anything on this topic in the manual of style. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

About Southern Center for Human Rights, and Draft:The Sun and Her Flowers

Hi Diannaa,
It would appear to me that, between the two of us, we've fixed the copyvio problems at Southern Center for Human Rights.
Could you possibly have a look at Draft:The Sun and Her Flowers? The draft has been rejected as too flowery :-), but it also appears to contain copyright violations: here's a snapshot from Google Books.
I would value your thoughts about this - Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:51, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your work rescuing Southern Center for Human Rights. I had a feeling it would be possible to do but I was baffled as to how. Regarding Draft:The Sun and Her Flowers, I am unable to view the Google snapshot from my location, so I can't help with that one. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:43, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Possible copyvio issues

Hi Diannaa. A new user (Tiwahi) replaces useful maps with his own works. The images have copyvio issues and do not seem user-generated. What should be done? Thank you. 98.214.89.172 (talk) 16:21, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

I've just looked through a couple dozen of their edits and am not seeing any maps changed/altered. Could you please give some examples? Primefac (talk) 17:45, 19 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

I've checked the user's uploads at the Commons, where they've uploaded several maps. I'm not seeing any obvious copyright issues with any of them. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:51, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Sumharam inaccurate location

Sumharam is a coastal town, but the map previously used on Hadramawt article shows it (inland)

Compare: The Old Map previously used in the Hadramawt article: Image:Map_of_Aksum_and_South_Arabia_ca._230_AD.jpg

The new map I drew for the Hadramawt article, with accurate details: File:Hadramawt_400_BC.jpg

An unregistered user, removed the map I drew from scratch (worked hours on) & I hope you can discuss this with him, since he/she decided to come to your page.

The actual location of Sumhuram is on the coast (17°2′20.4″N 54°26′4″E). Regards & hopefully you resolve this issue with the user who removed the maps I corrected.

The second issue the map is used specifically for Hadramaut & Hadramite, so it will naturally focus on the subject which might be an issue? Tiwahi (talk) 18:54, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

This is not the place to discuss the correctness of the maps. The place to do that is at the talk pages of the involved articles. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:52, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

ADAM

This is ADAM[11] rather than the NIH and is thus not PD. Hope all is well :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:09, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

copyright question: Google street view?

Are the images from Google maps, street view available to upload? C. W. Gilmore (talk) 01:34, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

No. Google copyrights all their images. Open source maps such as OpenStreetMap are available under a compatible license. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:09, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I thought there was an issue, but I figured I would ask. I have also emailed, asking the group that operates, Jefferson Davis Park, Washington for permission to use their images. I have yet to receive a reply, given the weather, it may be spring or even summer before I can get there and take descent photos myself so I figured I could ask. Thanks again C. W. Gilmore (talk) 15:30, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

I got the photos taken and uploaded, not the best, but it was a rainy autumn day in the Pacific Northwest. I will have to wait for a clear and breezy day to take pictures of the flags. Thanks for the help. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 09:52, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

AMDA Page

Hi there! I actually work for AMDA and we are trying to get the information and copy updated on our Wikipedia page. Is there a specific route I should take for this process? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domiblue (talk • contribs) 02:44, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in working on wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:10, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello again, so how would be go about updating the information you currently have listed, and using photos we own on the page? Particularly because our logo was recently changed, the number of students you list is inaccurate, and we would like to include images and information on both our campuses? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domiblue (talk • contribs) 00:58, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

What you need to do is propose changes on the article's talk page using the {{request edit}} template. Another editor has already provided a more detailed answer; see Talk:American Musical and Dramatic Academy. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Copy-edit Q.

Hi there. Hope you don't mind a quick question. I notice that you're involved with GOCE, and I have a comma problem that's driving me nuts. I can't work out if the statement "In 1815, Napoleon was defeated at Waterloo" requires that comma. I've searched various WP pages on MOS and copy-editing, but can't find anywhere that either answers the question or points me to where I can ask the question. Do you know of any such places? I'd be particulalry interested to know of any forum where the finer points of written English can be discussed; my English is not quite FA quality, and I'm hoping to get one or two articles up to that standard soon. TIA. FactotEm (talk) 17:22, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

I have the Chicago Manual of Style (16th edition) and it says "An introductory adverbial phrase is often set off by a comma but it need not be unless misreading is likely." One example they give of correct usage is After 1956 such complaints about poor fidelity became far less common. Since American English tends to use far more commas than British style, inclusion might depend on the style. Perhaps you could post specific questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors or get yourself one of these here Chicago books. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:43, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Grand. Thanks for your help. Much appreciated. FactotEm (talk) 21:50, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Galileo Magnet High School

Hi Diannaa, when you have the chance, this may need some rev/deletion for copyright issues. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 23:16, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Done! Thanks for your interest in copyvio clean-up. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:53, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

My pleasure. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:36, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Bucket (TV series)

Hi Diannaa, could you please check Bucket (TV series) for copyvio? Thanks and regards, JennyOz (talk) 03:19, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Plot summaries were all copyvio. Thanks for reporting, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:20, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you very much for dealing with them, JennyOz (talk) 13:27, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Your deletions from Jack Greenberg

This is dcw2003. Your deletions from Jack Greenberg were information I clearly cited from the Washington Post article and from other articles. My additions to the article from this source were modified significantly to prevent the possibility of copyright infringement. Did you believe they were copied directly from the article? They were not. What was the issue that caused you to remove them? Thanks, just checking, DCW2003 Of course the source is copyrighted. Nearly all source material from newspapers is. Please reply if you have time. Thank-you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcw2003 (talk • contribs)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright violation and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. You hardly modified the content at all, presenting the same material in the same order using almost identical wording. That's a copyright violation. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:43, 22 November 2017 (UTC)

Hazard Powder Company

Would you have a moment to look at recent edits to Hazard Powder Company. It was a cut-and-paste move from Hazardville, Connecticut, but large sections are still unsourced. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:26, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi M677. All the content was brought over as-is from Hazardville, Connecticut. I've added the required attribution and left a note on the talk page of the user who moved the material. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:48, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Round Table footnote in Ivison Macadam page

Thanks Dianaa, I had methodically double checked by e-mail my own records with the Hon Secretary of the Round Table magazine as to the sub-titles of the magazine over the years, which he confirmed back by e-mail as correct and sent the passage knowing it was for inclusion in the Wikipedia entry along with the link to the history of the Round Table but I see what you mean and I had not made that source clear. The titles are of course very much in the public domain but I will reword the footnote so it avoids beyond doubt any seemingly copyright problem. Many thanks for bringing this to my attention.William Macadam (talk) 10:36, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

CRI and copyrights

Hello Diannaa, Thanks for your watch on Center_for_Research_and_Interdisciplinarity. I'am both an wikipedian and a staff of this institute. We are aware of our students effort to revamp the page, I pointed them out earlier how to proceed and suggested them to ask me for support in case of conflict. I cannot see the exact section you deleted but they visibly copied content from our institute webpage without getting our webmaster to tag it as cc-by-sa prior to its integration on Wiki. Also, I will ask our webmaster to put the said page's content under cc-by-sa, so we can restore the content you hidden.

Also, as I never used this functionality of wikipedia (copyvio content masking/deletion?), I don't know if the content can be restored or what is or is not possible. Feel free to brief me on that.

I come back to you as soon as the said page is under cc-by-sa :D --Yug (talk) 12:44, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Hello Yug. Revision deletion was done to completely the copyright material from the page history. If and when the material is released under a compatible license, the revision deletion can be reversed and the content can be restored. Revision deletion and its removal require administrative tools. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:49, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Ok got it. The material can be restored. Thanks for explaining. Will need few hours for that. Yug (talk) 12:52, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Done : open license added, https://cri-paris.org/the-cri/, bottom of the page. I think you can restore the content previously masked for copyvio.

I tried to saved it to the web archive but failed on this. Seems the button "save page" disappeared. Yug (talk) 14:58, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

So sorry, but Creative Commons Attibution-Sharelike 4.0 is not a compatible license. Please see Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Can I add something to Wikipedia that I got from somewhere else? for a list of compatible licenses. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:06, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Oh. Good to know. It's funny that it goes to 3 but not 4. I ping my coworker on this but may need to wait Monday~ Yug (talk) 17:51, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Lucky me! Webmaster still here, leaving. He changed the license to 3.0, please check the link.

Note: I made few edits on that article by reflex since, my apologize. Feel free to overwrite or discard them if too troublesome. Yug (talk) 17:58, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

I have undone the revision deletion but I have not restored the content. If you wish to restore it you will have to do it yourself, as I don't want it to appear that I endorse its inclusion. It's pretty spammy / advertorial. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:25, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Using images in the Signpost

You are my 'go-to' editor regarding copyrights. I would like to use this image:File:Pierino contro tutti.jpg so that I can both critique the image along with creating a parody of the image in the Signpost. Thumbs up or down? Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 00:17, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Not okay. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:50, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Project Servator Questions

As this is my first ever personally written page I would appreciate constructive advice on how to stay close to the Wikipedia rules. From my understanding of your comments it would appear that the sources are OK but the quantity of text from these sources is too close to the original in these publications for your liking/wikipedia house rules. If this is so, I'll look again, removing the words and rewriting them from a personal interpretation of the words standpoint instead, which is what I think you are seeking. You also mention some quotations that are unecssarily positive about the person or group that are saying them - I get that point now and will tackle that too. You cited one publication as an issue Professional Security magazine, its stories are in the public domain. It is a source freely viewable through links on the web. It does not operate any sort of firewall for its content - which would be an obvious no no. Why is this not a good source? Steve virgin (talk) 15:47, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

The Professional Security magazine has a copyright notice on the bottom of their webpage: © PROFESSIONAL SECURITY MAGAZINE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. However, under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. Exceptions include works of the US Government and material specifically released under license. Even then, proper attribution is required.

Regarding our copyright standards, content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording at all from the source material. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Purdue or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:13, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Helpful. Interesting. Thanks Steve virgin (talk) 05:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

copyrighted information to be removed

Hi, thanks for checking stuff these trolls post though you have not removed the "source" of the copy-pasted data which is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Xiaomi_Redmi_Note_4&oldid=812001348 I also think that User:T.Rajasekhar_Reddy should receive warning for trolling and using copyrighted articles. Regards --Bololabich (talk) 21:34, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

I have no idea why you describe the editor as a troll; it appears he is simply one of the many people who does not yet understand our copyright requirements. I have now performed revision-deletion on his edit and warned. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:38, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

The reason of me calling him a troll is not him not knowing about copyrights but his other edits which were nothing more than changing informations to fake ones in RMN4 article :) --Bololabich (talk) 21:44, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Regarding my intro to Croatian science fiction, which was removed. The article had no intro at all, and I thought I condensed the article I borrowed from in my own words, with few, if any, actual quotations. What was wrong with that? I realize it was a single source, but I've seen much worse on Wikipedia.--Manky b (talk) 20:52, 10 December 2017 (UTC) As an addendum, it seems all you get from Wikipedia for your hard work is criticism. Maybe that's why it is so bad.--Manky b (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Using the wiki to advertise?

Hi Dianna,

Not trying to cause a fuss or anything, but is this allowed? Please see User:Bj Simkhada for further info.

Kind regards, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:05, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Someone else has blanked the page. Thanks for your note, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 09:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Rancho Las Camaritas

I do not understand your message about what is common source material, as you did not identify what items in the Las camaritas Rancho page that might be or not. I have over 35 citations in the piece linked to content as well as many inline links to other wikipedia pages. I don't believe that I have duplicated any content other than a portion of the first line verbatim from any other source - which I have changed this afternoon to make it read better.

so am confused or unclear on what items you are referring to, especially since the overall piece is quite large.

Since I'm unclear what items are concerned about I can only guess.

So any specifics would be helpfur.

If you are mentioning pictures which were all taken from Wikimedia, I assume that when each image is clicked on the image shows its source and usage, and is enough — Preceding unsigned comment added by Energynet (talk • contribs) 00:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Energynet. Sorry for nor being more clear. The article appears to contain material copied from "Muwekma Ohlone Tribe v. GALE A. NORTON, Secretary of the Interior and AURENE MARTIN, Acting Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs" (PDF). United States District Court for the District of Columbia. June 6, 2003. p. 7., which is okay to copy, because it's in the public domain, but you have to add attribution to let the reader know that the material is copied from that source and not prose that you wrote yourself. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 09:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	thank u so much for the useful information i will remember it while making my next edit Billthegreatest (talk) 06:12, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Lotus Esprit GT1

Material will be added with reference. Only a chunk of information was added from the website as it is hard to research upon the said subject. U1Quattro (talk) 14:29, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, but that doesn't make it okay to add copyvio. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:55, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Islamic Military Counter Terrorism Coalition

Hello Diannaa, could you scrub this edit from the history? It is a word for word copy of the subjects website. Thanks, Loopy30 (talk) 19:33, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Done. For what it's worth, Loopy30, using {{revdel}} (or the revdel script if you're so inclined) is probably a more efficient way to get copyright revdel'd. Primefac (talk) 19:51, 27 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

poss copyvio

Hello! could you have a look please at the history section of Yarra Yarra Rowing Club, in which large sections match perfectly with this official web site. Here's the report. I'm not sure which came first, and leave it to your excellent opinion!198.58.171.47 (talk) 21:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for the question. The oldest copy of that page on the Wayback Machine is dated February 22, 2015, and this tool shows the page was created November 30, 2009, and this tool shows a creation date of November 15, 2008. We have had the content since February 2, 2008, so if it's copyvio, I can't prove it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know, I am rewriting it in my own words now.

Symone--SymoneShah (talk) 00:19, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Thomas Mann

Hi Diannaa.

Thanks for the correction of my contribution to the Thomas Mann article. I will learn and do my best to follow the copyright rules.

I realize why the history of my edit containing copyrighted material is no longer available publicly, but it seems a bit impractical that Wiki doesn't allow me, the contributor, to review the miscopypasted and deleted piece. As otherwise I would have known exactly what was wrong.

Peace! Brandmajor (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

I can send you the removed material via email, but you will have to activate your Wikipedia email first. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

why you deleted my edits???

Hi dear, I am leenibraheem. what is the proplem you have deleted my editis for Nematosteela. i did not understand why/. this is my home work and i have to submit it Nov, 30. i did not copy or paralyze i put the references and the source of my two photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leenibraheem (talk • contribs) 15:44, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

The content was removed because you added copyright material without any evidence of permission from the copyright holder. That's a violation of copyright law and the copyright policy of this website. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:49, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Centum Cellas

Thankyou Diannaa. Does the attribution show on the page (I cannot see it) or just in the history? Best regards Notafly (talk) 17:40, 29 November 2017 (UTC) PS If I have copied text before I cannot remember where. In the future I will attribute correctly.Some of my recent text is translated. I have to fix that too

Hi Notafly. The attribution shows in the edit history. This is considered a permanent record for attribution purposes. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:53, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Thankyou.That is very clear as is the necessity. Regards again Notafly (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio Romania–United States relations

Hi Diannaa, could you check the "History" section added to this article in June 2017. It appears to be a copy & paste from a section titled "U.S.-ROMANIAN RELATIONS" in this article. Thanks. Woodlot (talk) 20:22, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Searching back to the earliest revision, I found it was a properly attributed copy of a US State Dept document (very different from the current version now present on the State Dept website). I have added the required attribution and removed some other copyvio and suspected copyvio from the article. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Copyvio from Rhine Revival

Hi there is a current sockpuppet investigation here about a banned user [12], on his latest sock he has edited the Joseph Banks Rhine article and added copyvio. On this account he added 844 words from a book, this seems excessive [13]. He also added a lot of other dubious material some of which looks like copyvio from some unreliable psychic papers. The user that is doing this is using a clever tactic. He reverts his material after he uploads it [14]. He does this so his controversial material is still stored in the Wikipedia database in an old version. He then links to his version off-Wikipedia. There is a current investigation about this on the SPI but I am just requesting if his edits could be striked or not. I believe the material he has uploaded should be removed. If I have made a mistake and it is not copyvio, then I apologize. Thanks. 117.20.41.10 (talk) 01:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

The material was framed as a block quote so technically it was not a copyvio so I am not going to do revision deletion. I see you have asked this question at the SPI where a different admin may feel differently about it. But I am not going to do it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:17, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Two Copypatrol issues

There are two classes of items in copy patrol that I have taken to tagging as "no action needed". Given that they typically involve copyright violations, and arguably should be addressed differently, I'd like to make sure we are in agreement that neither are worth addressing and both can be ignored.

This is an example of the first. In case it happens to get deleted, it is someone using our biography template to start an article. It's my opinion that for an editor to follow best practices, they should make a copy of that template off-line and makes enough changes to it so that they replace or remove all of the original text, but given that the copyright belongs to some Wikipedia editor and it was specifically designed for this purpose, I think it would be silly to remove this as a copyright violation.

The second issue is that I occasionally see an edit to the sandbox tagged. I don't mean a particular user's sandbox, which ought to be addressed, but the generic Wikipedia sandbox: Wikipedia:Sandbox. It gets cleared out every day and while that action doesn't remove a potential copyright violation from the history, I think we have better things to do with their time than to rev-del copyright issues in that sandbox.

Do you disagree?--S Philbrick (Talk) 18:34, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Normally I mark the biography template ones as "no action needed" (and I don't alert the user that attribution is technically required). But I usually do rev-deletions in the sandbox if it's copied from an external website. If they've pasted content from a Wikipedia article, I will remove it if it's not already been swept out, but I don't bother to alert the user that attribution is technically required. I agree that we have to budget our time wisely, and we have to be realistic: with 5.5 million articles, we are never going to remove all copyvio; we can only do our best with the available crew and resources. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:44, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

I might not be part of copypatrol, but during the week I stalk the RD1 cat and try to deal with things quickly. Primefac (talk) 19:07, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

OK thanks.--S Philbrick (Talk) 19:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Tomotherapy

Hi, Diannaa, how's it going? OTRS permission has come through for the Matthew Squires article that was plagiarised at Tomotherapy, so perhaps the three revisions from 11 July could be unhidden? Many thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:05, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jlan. All is well here, as well as can be expected in Edmonchuk. Task complete, revision deletion reversed and content restored. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:37, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyvio.

Hello Diannaa, I detected a slight copyright violation at Paul Mosley. It was inserted by a newly registered user. Here is the vio. edit. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 00:51, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Clean-up complete. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:40, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

Western Environmental Law Center, OTRS permission

Hi, we received an OTRS permission for some text published at https://westernlaw.org/about-us/our-history/, regarding Western Environmental Law Center. Can you please restore the deleted version, on the basis of ticket:2017092810010915? The customer sent us a text in CC0 license. If you need more information, I'm here. --Ruthven (msg) 13:31, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

Done. Why are you calling them a "customer"? surely they are not paying anyone? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:50, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

It's the usual name we use on OTRS :) The owner of a ticket is the agent that's answering, and the customer is the user that wrote. Unfortunately, there is no money involved… BTW Thanks for solving this! --Ruthven (msg) 22:25, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

A pref for "by" symbol?

Hi Diannaa, can I get your opinion, am I correct in surmizing there's no WP preference for either "x" or "×" when describing dimensions, e.g. for a chessboard, "64 squares arranged in an 8×8 grid" versus "64 squares arranged in an 8x8 grid"? (MOS:COMMONMATH says "The letter x should not be used to indicate multiplication, but it is used (unspaced) as the substitute for "by" in terms such as 4x4." [Interesting, that article uses "4×4" in nearly all cases, not "4x4".] Multiplication sign says "×" can represent "by" when expressing dimensions, but again no preference is mentioned.) Thank u. --IHTS (talk) 02:50, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I think you should go by what the Manual of Style says, rather than what the article Multiplication sign says. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:24, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Ok, but is the MoS indicating a preference? (I read "is used" to perhaps mean "sometimes used" or "often used", not "should be used".) Also giving me pause is the use of "×" in article 4x4. --IHTS (talk) 21:28, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

I just found Talk:Four-wheel drive#"letter x" or "× (times)"? and added post there. I'm thinking this might be can of worms!? Thx, --IHTS (talk) 21:50, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

(ec) It says "it is used" but it's a guideline. No idea how seriously people take this stuff, unless at FA level, in which case you should check your Chicago Manual of Style, which says in section 3.27 to use the multiplication sign, not an x. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:59, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Thx for looking that up (I don't have a copy of the Chicago book)! --IHTS (talk) 22:25, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyright issue

Thanks Diana. I guess the amount of quoted material was considered too much. Sorry about that. Will keep your helpful advice in mind in the future!Cardbuff (talk) 19:46, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

José Pereira (scholar)

Hi Diannaa,

Could you revdel some of the edits in the history of this article? I came across it while doing a copy edit on a related article and upon going through it noticed that the text was copied word for word from the source. Rather than just blank the article, as it had some relevance to the article I was copy editing, I heavily edited the text to remove the copyvio. The violations remain in the history however. Thanks. --Blackmane (talk) 04:23, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

All done now. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:02, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Jackie Oliver

Hello, this edit appears to be a copy-vio of this page. I have removed the content but I imagine it will have to be revdel'd? Thanks. I also left a message at the IP talk page but I don't think English is their first language judging by their response (and other messages there). Thanks. Regards, Eagleash (talk) 18:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

PS. I hope you don't have to delete my subsequent edits! Eagleash (talk) 18:43, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Done. Subsequent edits did not have to be removed or revision-deleted. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:21, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. Eagleash (talk) 22:34, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Inquiry of Submitting our wiki page

hi, Diannaa This is our first time using Wikipedia to create our own site, so we are still learning. We are rephrased many of our sentences but cannot submit it to verify. Is it because of the previous copyright infringement? Thank you for helping us out and giving us the alert. The link is below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Doppler_optical_coherence_tomography — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vvvany (talk • contribs) 03:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright violation and was assessed by myself and later by a different administrator when you re-posted the same material. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. You imply that more than one person is using the account. Wikipedia does not permit shared accounts. Each user must have their own account. Please stop adding copyright content to this website. Continue to do so and you will be blocked from editing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:56, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for guiding me through. I have deleted the words with copyright issues and rephrased the words on this page and was wondering if it Ok? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vvvany (talk • contribs) 18:27, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, this version is okay from a copyright point of view. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:46, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Editing Information on Central Bank of Kenya

Hi Diannaa,

I believe you are removing information on the Central Bank of Kenya in error. We are the owners of the copyrighted material.

wgkantai — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wgkantai (talk • contribs) 06:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

The source webpage is marked at the bottom as © 2017 Central Bank of Kenya. If the copyright holder wishes to release this material to Wikipedia under license, please see the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:51, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

CC-BY-SA 3.0 and retroactive attribution

Hi Diannaa! Quick question re: retroactive healing for copying from free sources. Huon created Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:2012phenomenon/Drafts/Mako Mori because it was a paraphrase of Wikia, and thus a derivative work. He was under the impression that CC-BY-SA 3.0 could not be retroactively healed, while I was under the impression that it could, since we frequently do this for copying within Wikipedia and will undo revision deletions and the like once we have proof of CC-BY-SA 3.0 or freer status. I'm sure your thoughts here would be appreciated. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:59, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

I don't see why the attribution cannot be added once its lack is discovered. I do this daily when working on the copyvio reports, and we also do it when OTRS permission is received from copyright holders of photos or external websites. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:14, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyvio on Sukhoi Su-57

Diannaa, this addition is a complete copyvio of this copyrighted source? Does it need to be revision deleted? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 04:01, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:57, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Draft:ForbesStreetStudios

Hi Dianaa. I am sad that my text has been removed as I only added it and was soon to edit it. It was just there as I had put the words there so they were easier for me to write. I WAS going to paraphrase the information and then cite the source, however now that it has been removed I guess I can't do that. I was under the assumption that I was free to draft the page until I wanted to submit it for review and publishing, and THEN people would review it, but if it is constantly being reviewed whilst I am trying to write it, how should I get it done. I am not unfamiliar with citing and referencing as I am a uni student, but I was taking my time editing the page.

Also a question for you. I am an unpaid intern for Forbes street studios, and they wished for me to create a Wikipedia page for them. Are there any problems with this, I have already placed a COI in the talk for my page but I didn't think any of this would be a problem until I would get it reviewed.

Thanks. Jamie. Gypsyrose9 (talk) 06:05, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Please don't add copyright content to this wiki, not even temporarily for editing. We can't host copyright material anywhere on this website, even in drafts or sandboxes. Please do your amendments before you save the page, or use an external editor. I can send you the deleted material via email if you like. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:57, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Okay that makes sense! I didn't really grasp the idea that a saved edit is still content on the site. Thank you for helping me. Is it possible to inquire for someone who is not connected to the organisation to help me write the page so that it remains unbiased? Would you be willing to help me maybe? Gypsyrose9 (talk) 00:51, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I suggest you visit the Teahouse, whhere there's people standing by that are experienced in helping newcomers. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:27, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Revdel request, NIV translation of the Bible

Hello Diannaa, in copypatrol I across this diff of where a now indeffed user copied a large chunk of the Bible into the article. CBNG removed it, but the revision ranges are still available, and since the NIV is still under copyright, should they be revdelled? This is the link to the revisions in question. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) 14:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Yah, that translation is under copyright, so I have done revision deletion. Off to yoga class now, ttyl. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:07, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Reporting Copy-right violation for deletion

Hi Diannaa, there is another edit you might want to delete. Here is the diff of it and it was taken directly from the webiste word to word ([15]). I have already given the involved user a new user CV warning on their talk page. Thanks. Adamgerber80 (talk) 17:13, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for your help with copyvio clean-up. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:00, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

TARDIS Builder

You have just usernameblocked this editor as being potentially part of a group. I note that you are based in Alberta, Canada, and it may well be that you are not familiar with television programmes on the UK side of the pond. The word TARDIS is an acronym for Time And Relative Dimensions In Space, and relates to a time and space travelling vehicle which is central to a long-running television programme called "Doctor Who". The name is harmless. Ther user has expressed the willingness for a name change, but I would actually like to perform a straightforward unblock. I will not, of course, do so without your agreement. How say you?--Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 17:41, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Anthony, thanks for the message. The reason I did it was because there's a website with that name, http://tardisbuilders.com/. I have asked if they're affiliated with that site, and if they're not, the username is ok as is.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:57, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Hohner

Hi Dianna. Whenever you have time. Thank you. Dr. K. 20:32, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

And another by the same user. Dr. K. 20:37, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

done. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:58, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, as always, Dianna. Take care. Dr. K. 21:02, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

He's done it again. Dr. K. 21:13, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Done again. :) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:21, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

You are tireless Dianna. :) Thanks again. Dr. K. 23:44, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Tireless now that I've had my nap and a cup of coffee! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:50, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Lol. Looks very inviting. Nice location to have a frappé. But I still think your dedication cannot be explained away so easily. :) Dr. K. 00:38, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Looks nice; maybe a pop-over is in order :) Kierzek (talk) 01:34, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Definitely, Kierzek. The company could not have been any better. :) Dr. K. 03:29, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Mayawati

Hi Dianna. I guess long time, no see. :) In any case, this edit from 16 May 2016 introduced a copyvio from business-standard, which I removed today along with other copyvios from several sources. The usual disclaimers apply. Take care. Dr. K. 07:49, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the report, as always — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:22, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Proper attribution question

You are correct. There was attribution for that content when copied from Food allergy to Egg allergy, but not when copied again to Milk allergy. As I continue to work on Milk allergy I will pay attention to original source, not just last source. David notMD (talk) 15:46, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Charles Freeman (historian)

Hi Diannaa, I've twice removed content that was self-sourced to a blog. Only now do I realize that much of Mr. Prager's wording may have been copied directly from what he wrote there. At your convenience please have a look and see if rev/deletion is necessary. And very happy holidays, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 17:03, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I agree with the removal of the content as people should not be adding their own work to Wikipedia, as there's a conflict of interest and a question of original research. However as it was framed as a quotation it is not technically a copyvio and therefore does not qualify for revision deletion. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:58, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:15, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, and it's good to have you back. :) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:16, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Oh, it was an embarrassingly short hiatus. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:50, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sayin nothing, I'm just sayin — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Previous edit summary was just a joke. Sarcasm doesn't work well on the Internet, now I feel bad for teasing you — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:02, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Not at all. If the ballet slipper fits I gotta wear it. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:36, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Editor's Barnstar
		With gratitude for your consistently good-natured assistance. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:04, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/Will Aeds

Can you please block the aforementioned user? They seem to purposefully ignore talk page notices about disrupting articles, including the insertion of factual errors. Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:31, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Kasundi

No problem. It is work in progress anyways. But, it would be great help if you could provide a link or something, so I can check the amount of plagiarism. I prefer to keep as close to sources as possible to avoid OR, but also try to copy-edit the stuff beyond plagiarism. Any plagiarism checker would be a great help. :D Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 14:58, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view a small amount of the overlap. Further checking revealed a lot of additional copyvio from the sources listed in the page history. I can send you a copy of the deleted material via email if you like. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:35, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

That would be most helpful. I just found out that the history is deleted too, not just the material. I was thinking of shifting it to my sandbox. But that would be quite impossible now. :( Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 15:50, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry but we can't host copyright material anywhere on this website, not even in sandboxes or drafts, not even temporarily for editing. I am sending you via email the version of the article before I removed the copyvio, but it will all have to be re-written in your own words before you can re-add it to Wikipedia. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:59, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. (added) By the way, I believe we have lowered our threshold of tolerance. I just read through the policies and guidelines. Wow! We used to give almost everything a chance. May it is the drive for quality! Still a little more forewarning would have a helped me and a lot of other editors. One question, is there a guideline for how close to original is permissible anywhere, even if it is off-Wikipedia? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 20:54, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Purdue or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:06, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Not close looks like very far indeed. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 19:38, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Litany of the Blessed Virgin Mary

Please clarify why the information regarding musical adaptations was removed when there were four sources cited for the six composers listed. Mannanan51 (talk) 18:36, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

The wording was copied directly from another website, and thus was a copyright violation. All content you add to Wikipedia must be written in your own words. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:04, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

The text was taken from Sullivan's 1918 book as cited, wouldn't that be PD? Mannanan51 (talk) 23:47, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes it is. I see that now. Sorry for the mistake. In the future, please add attribution when copying from public domain sources: simply add the template {{PD-notice}} after your citation. I have done so for this article. Please do this in the future so that our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:56, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyright problem

Diannaa

Thanks for highlighting the copyright problem on Nicky Gumbel's web page, I appreciate it.

For background the text is originally taken from an article written in the Independent in 2008 (also referenced) by Deborah Orr. Unfortunately the Independent article is no longer available online so I referenced the alternative website where the text is. I can see how this can cause a copyright problem as the text is The Independent's, not the other website (to which I am not connected). There is no absolute need to give a web reference, so can I suggest as a solution I do not link to the http://www.virtueonline.org/england-meaning-life-reverend-nicky-gumbel but merely reference the Independent?

Keith Johnston (talk) 09:07, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Update: Having reviewed your edits I now don't think my proposed solution will work. I see your further point is that there is excessive quoting from the article, which I accept. I will repost in a different format, referencing The Independent, and substantially reduce the direct quotes used. Keith Johnston (talk) 09:50, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

There were two problems: copyright violations and excessive quoting from non-free sources. A little quotation is okay. A lot is not okay. Copyright violations are a lot more serious, and should not be done at all. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:52, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks and understood Keith Johnston (talk) 16:17, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Hanukkah

Dear Diannaa. Tomorrow is Hanukkah and I think there a multiple copyright violations in the article. Please see the result of Earwig's Copyvio Detector, remove the copyvios and hide the edits. Thanks. --Mhhossein ^talk 15:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Or contact those sites and thank them for using Wikipedia articles which seems more likely considering the sites listed and timing involved. Sir Joseph ^(talk) 16:49, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

LSUS

Dear Diannaa, I'm officially working under the direction of Brooke Rinaudo, Director of Public Relations and Media, at LSUS, and have been tasked to update our Wikipedia page. The content I'm using is directly from our site and I have full rights to the material in my position. How are you determining what is copyright or not? A picture I took was removed due to copyright, and I don't understand. Please explain to me how and why you believe the material posted is copyrighted and therefore not usable on this site? I'm getting frustrated fixing up the page just to have it removed the next day. I don't want to be blocked but need further assistance, and the message you sent me as contradictions within it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Denniswhenderson (talk • contribs) 16:17, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Denniswhenderson, The LSUS pages in question have Copyright © 2017. Louisiana State University Shreveport. All Rights Reserved. at the bottom. This means that LSUS holds the copyright, and thus Wikipedia cannot host the text. A "copyleft" notice can be left on individual pages, though; see WP:DONATETEXT for more information.

The long and the short of it is that if you write your updates in your own words, you won't have any issues. Primefac (talk) 16:20, 12 December 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Copyright Issue

Hi Diannaa, thank you very much for swiftly reviewing my recent article 'Ueda Sōko (Shigeyasu)'. The material I reference was from www.uedasokochanoyu.com. This page shows creative commons on the footer of the website, so I think the material is okay to use with appropriate references (which I believe I have included). Does this satisfy? If not I shall re-word in order to pass this article. Best wishes and thanks. Ikkyu pop a doodle doo — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikkyu pop a doodle doo (talk • contribs) 18:33, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

The license is a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which isn't compatible with Wikipedia; we can't do NonCom licenses. Primefac (talk) 19:07, 12 December 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Okay, thanks. I guess that Wikipedia can't work with such licenses as it can't guarantee not for profit re-use? I shall re-work the article today and make a note here when it is ready for review. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikkyu pop a doodle doo (talk • contribs) 08:25, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I have updated the article and I believe it to be free of any copyright issues now. Thanks and best wishes. Sōmu 18:21, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the current version is okay from a copyright point of view. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:42, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Sōmu 07:11, 14 December 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikkyu pop a doodle doo (talk • contribs)

Paraneoplastic syndrome

Thanks for spotting the copyright violations on paraneoplastic syndrome. The editor had removed the usual hallmarks of copyvio (e.g. retained footnote code). I see you've left a warning... JFW | T@lk 15:05, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Draft: Bioelectricity---clarification in copyright issues---many thanks for your help!

Greetings Diana,

Thank you for enlightening me of some of my errors, as I am new to this and the page I am working on is not public yet (due to the fact that it is still a work in progress, as I am still learning the correct methods). I do apologize for any mistakes I have made. I want to assure you that I have permission from all the authors of the work to post their work and errors that have been made, have been made because I am new to this and not because I am trying to steal anyone's work. It appears that there is an issue with all of the images/files that I posted on the page, as they have been removed. I want to make sure I correct my understanding before I make any further edits. I have identified two possible things that I have made mistakes on, in which perhaps you can help clarify for me. 1.) The legends/description of the images. I had originally taken the text from the images from the source that it was with, as each file was attributed to the author and I thought that their words would best describe their image. Is it alright if I put their entire description in double quote's or should I paraphrase the whole description? Also, for the file:images, I don't typically see a reference section, but should I include one? 2.) I thought I had picked the right permission for the files:images, but perhaps I was wrong. It was my understanding that information printed in a scientific journal was under "Public Domain". Is this wrong? And with the Public Domain free licensing, do I need to do something additional that I have not seen to do?

Thank you very much for any clarification that you might be able to lend. I plan to not post anything else until I am sure that I properly understand the rules, as I certainly don't want to do incorrect work or be blocked from editing.

Sincerely, Tia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiadeeharrison (talk • contribs) 15:27, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Under current copyright law, literary works and photographs are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. You should only upload photos that you have taken yourself. Also, prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the law and the copyright policy of this website to do so. The material you added is not in the public domain; it's copyright, and released under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial License, which is not a compatible license. If the copyright holder wishes to release this material to Wikipedia under license, please see the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:41, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Diana, Thank you very much. I am requesting all original authors/creators/owners of images to release the material to Wikipedia under the recommended license, then upload their images, and now I am using those respective images on the Bioelectricity page. I hope this time it is correct. But if you do have time to look over the newly added images (so far just 3a and 3b on the Bioelectricity page) to ensure that everything is correct, I certainly do appreciate any insight you can share so that we can present our work in the correct format. Thank you very much for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tiadeeharrison (talk • contribs) 21:47, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

If you are not the copyright holder of the images, you need to ask the copyright holder to release them under license. There's instructions as to how to do that at Commons:Commons:OTRS. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:52, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyvios on List of tests

List of tests (an extraordinarily nerdy article) has twice had whole blocks of text added by Toddw1717 which I have reverted. However on more detailed examination, this text is very clearly a copy vio from here. I have provided advice to the editor concerned. When you have a quiet moment , perhaps a rev del would be in order. Many thanks Velella ^{Velella Talk} 00:02, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Rev-del done. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:22, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

List copyright question

Hi Dianna. I am wondering if Jane Boyd#Honours and awards would be considered a copvio of this. I mean a bullet list is not really very creative and ordering things chronologically seems also quite common. Still, I thought I'd ask out of curiousity. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:42, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Marchjuly, if it were a list of awards with descriptions of each award, it would probably be a copyvio, but just a list of items doesn't fall under cv rules. Primefac (talk) 13:04, 14 December 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Thanks for the clarification Primefac. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:05, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Copyright Issue

Hi Diannaa, on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:LabIndia I've replaced the copyrighted content as per your suggestion -^[1] (remove copyright content copied from https://www.telegraphindia.com/pressrelease/bwi/44525/worldwide-achievers-felicitated-the-winners-of-international.html)

Infact, the page you're referring to highlights the "worldwide achievers & health excellence award winners of 2016" and I was talking about the winners of 2015. To rectify the issue, I've replaced the source & cited the appropriate source with not the copied content but mentioned it from the NPOV.

Please have a look & kindly approve the draft to move it into the article space. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HemantWikiP (talk • contribs) 12:19, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I have done some more copyright clean-up on your draft. There's lots of people ahead of you in the queue; please be patient. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:07, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

References

^ https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:LabIndia&diff=prev&oldid=815045325

Journal of Thermal Stresses

Hi Diana,

I'm a bit confused about what content on the proposed site is copyrighted? Do I need to get permission to insert links from other wikipedia sites? (sorry, this is my first time doing this!)

Best, maeve — Preceding unsigned comment added by Maevereilly (talk • contribs) 17:12, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright violation and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. Prose you find online is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the law and the copyright policy of this website to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. Copyright law and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:05, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

REVDEL?

Does this need to be REVDEL'd? Earwig analysis Would that remove all the subsequent work that has been done? I am going to save the other parts of the article in my userspace in case it does so all the work won't be lost. I have asked this user 3 times to not copy and paste directly from articles, and I am still not sure he understands the concept of significant language User_talk:Wiking#Close_paraphasing_warning Seraphim System ^(talk) 03:12, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

I have removed the material copied from Haaretz and revision-deleted the intervening diffs. This does not remove the intervening edits but hides them from view in the history. The same person added the same material to Positions on Jerusalem so I have issued another warning on their talk page. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 04:01, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Seraphim System ^(talk) 05:24, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Revdel for Draft:Molden

Hi Diannaa. You did a revdel on Molden, but the same content might also be being used in Draft:Molden. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:15, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Done. Primefac (talk) 12:58, 15 December 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Thank you Primefac -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:56, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Please re-instate...

I did not remove the quotes from the material in Man flu; Anomalocaris did, while correcting a problem I was having with the citation links. Is it possible to re-instate the material? Cheers Shir-El too 15:43, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

If I paraphrase can it be added back in? SEASON'S GREETINGS!!! Shir-El too 15:47, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Please re-write the content in your own words; this avoids the copyright issue and is in better alignment with our non-free content policy. Let me know when you're done if you want me to check the resulting prose. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:06, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Done! Thank you, Shir-El too 17:14, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia & Copyright

Thank you for the welcome to Wikipedia and reviewing my article. I understand all of your changes and hope to improve my Wikipedia editing skills over time. Thank you for being open for questions and help. I have a question about the Canadian Patient Safety Institute article I am trying to build. I decided to build it because another article mentioned the organization. To get the article approved in the next two months, should I try again at paraphrasing some of the references or just leave your edits? I don't want to diminish the chances of the page being approved. Asaraga (talk) 16:52, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

The thing that is most likely to get your draft accepted is mentions of the organization in sources independent of the organization - new reports, magazines, books, etc. Paraphrased content from the organization's own website does not improve the chances of the draft being accepted, as it does nothing to establish notability, which is a very common reason for drafts being declined and articles being deleted. Please refer to Wikipedia:Your first article, which contains lots of advice on how to create articles for this encyclopedia. You might consider visiting the Teahouse. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:00, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Please advise...

Hello. Thanks for pointing out my mistakes in the National Skill Development Corporation page. I am new to Wikipedia ad thought you may allow content "As-is" from some sources like Govt of India websites etc; Is it possible for me to see the last version of my unacceptable writing - before you edited it - that could be a good starting point for me, and this time I promise to leave no copy-pasted material. Thanks User:Subho2017

I am sending you a copy of the deleted material by email. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:49, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks - got it. User:Subho2017 I made a fresh attempt at the page, taking care not to break any copyright norms. Hope it was acceptable. User:Subho2017

I have done some more copyvio clean up and the page is now okay from a copyright point of view. Thank you for taking the time to do that. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:27, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks- could you advise about how to get rid of the "written like an advertisement" and "needs citation" bit - what do I have to do to get rid of these? User:Subho2017 —Preceding undated comment added 11:03, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Perhaps you should ask the person who added them. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:50, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

EMEA College Of Arts and Science

The texts are copied from the website you are righright.But that website is the website of EMEA College Of Arts and Science,they have no problem unless we use it for educational purposes. So Kindly please undo your edit.You have made a mistake Diannaa. Rishad Pkn (talk) 20:18, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder or think you have their permission, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation before that can happen. They need to release the material under a compatible license. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:22, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Dunkirk evacuation

Has the copyright issue over that image really been resolved? Mjroots (talk) 21:10, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

I think the book is PD, see commons:Template:PD-GermanGov. Regardless of the copyright issue, I don't think the photo is a good fit in the article, as there's no context. We need to be selective as to what images we include so as they will be meaningful and enlightening and on-topic. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:14, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Saturnalia!

		Happy Saturnalia
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free and you not often get distracted by dice-playing. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:52, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Parents' Worship Day

Hi Diannaa, perhaps you can have a look at this. I've removed a bit of soapbox content, at least some of which appears to have been copied, as from here [16]. There may be some rev/deletion necessary, and maybe there's more copyright violation. Thanks and cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 16:09, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

The current version looks okay from a copyright point of view. I will do some revision deletion in a minute here. Thanks as always, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:19, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

As always, much appreciated. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 21:55, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

DCV instructions

It was pointed out to me on my talk page (see User_talk:TonyBallioni#Request) that WP:DCV could use some updating to reflect the current practice with the revdel template and/or reaching out to an admin directly. I could take a crack at it, but you'd probably do better at describing it than me. If you don't want to take on the task, I'll do it, but thoughts would be appreciated in that case :) TonyBallioni (talk) 17:35, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly what amendments you have in mind so it might be better if you do it, or alternatively make a proposal on the talk page in case there's any other interested parties who would like to have a look. What seems to be the at least part of the problem is that no one is working on the cases at WP:CP at present, and there's a lot of unresolved cases on the board right now. I will do some today. I have also posted comments at User talk:TonyBallioni/Archive 10#Request — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:11, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts. I've been working the paid-editing stuff recently, and with the added load of being involved with the arbcom case around that, I haven't had much time to work the CopyPatrol board. Sorry you've been having to do even more of the heavy lifting than normal. Hopefully once the case is resolved, I'll be able to spend more time on the copyvio stuff: both a great thing to do during insomnia and much more relaxing than arbcom... TonyBallioni (talk) 21:21, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

But frankly folks, what isn't!

My problem is some repetitive stress injuries, nursing along, trying not to spend as much time editing as I used to so as to give my sore wrist and elbow a chance to heal. Hence I have reduced my editing time to a bare minimum — keeping up with my watch-list, Copypatrol, and one or two other activities. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:30, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Re: ArbCom, ha! Re: your wrist, get better! Re: the actual topic of this thread, I've updated DCV and explained it on the talk page. Feel free to make any tweaks you think better reflect current practice :) TonyBallioni (talk) 22:05, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

It looks great; much clearer. Thank you. While you did that, I got one article cleared at WP:CP. Getting stuff done and taking names — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:13, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Avedis Zildjian Company

Good morning, Diannaa, could you check this for copyright violations? It's a longtime problem article. Thank you and cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:21, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Ugh, that is a "who wrote it first" nightmare. I'm getting hits on almost every old revision of the page following this version (which was "cleared" of copyvios), so I'm assuming that this hit is a reverse copy. However, this page seems to be showing up later in the history with this edit. Given that it also pings off Zildjian's own website, I'm going to remove the offending text and revdel from that point onwards, but if you think the older summaries are copyvio you're welcome to revdel further. Primefac (talk) 15:54, 19 December 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)

Thank you, Primefac. The uncertainty about which version came first was a main reason I requested assistance. Also, I recall a history of sock-related edits that spilled over from western state school district articles. Go figure. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 16:05, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Hopefully I got it all, and if not I'm sure Diannaa will find it ;) Primefac (talk) 16:17, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

The current version looks okay as far as I can tell. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:53, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

references in PDF

I've never seen an entire article sourced from PDF scans. It seems like the references themselves might be copyvio in that format. Passing it to your capable eyes.104.163.153.162 (talk) 02:23, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Linking to works that violate the original creator's copyright is not permitted. I have removed the links. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:26, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

thanks!104.163.153.162 (talk) 08:54, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

All Japan Iaido Federation

Hello Dianaa, thank you for being vigilant with copyright, I am however a bit befuddled with what I put on All Japan Iaidō Federation which was copyrighted? The "Tōhō" for the All Japan Iaido Federation is a list of techniques used for grading students from the varying styles in a fair manner - if it's the list, there isn't anything I can change about that :P I am going to try to write that section from memory without looking at any sources (in which case I hope it is sufficiently "in my own words") but I want to make sure I'm not dinged hard for doing so, as this is my second "copyright violation". I want to make sure that what I do is correct and I also want to make sure I add this information :) My intentions are genuine! Euxneks (talk) 18:17, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

Plain lists are okay to add, but the content I removed went far beyond that. The current version is okay from a copyright point of view. Thanks for taking the time to look after that. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:32, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

	Happy Holidays
	Wishing you a happy holiday season! Times flies and 2018 is around the corner. Thank you for your contributions. ~ K.e.coffman (talk) 00:16, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy holidays!

Happy Holidays

This user wishes you a very Happy Holiday season.

Marquardtika (talk) 06:14, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

	Wishing you and yours a Merry Christmas and a happy, healthy and prosperous New Year 2018!
	Thank you for all the hard work and effort you put into Wikipedia. God bless! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 02:29, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:04, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Re:Wikipedia and copyright

You accused me for adding copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder:

15:18, 19 December 2017‎ Diannaa (talk | contribs)‎ . . (235,217 bytes) (-961)‎ . . (remove copyright content, mostly copied from https://www.ncronline.org/news/accountability/editorial-abuse-church-has-changed-not-enough).

Bear in mind that Wikipedia is an US based online encyclopedia therefore a subject of the Copyright Law of the United States and Related Laws Contained in Tıtle 17 of the United States Code. A lawful proof of some copyright violation can be given only in the terms of the US Copyright Law since the copyright violation is a legal, not a Wikipedia term. The US Copyright Law can be complemented only by international agreements.

An “international agreement” is—
(1) the Universal Copyright Convention;
(2) the Geneva Phonograms Convention;
(3) the Berne Convention;
(4) the WTO Agreement;
(5) the WIPO Copyright Treaty;
(6) the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty; and
(7) any other copyright treaty to which the United States is a party.

(The above text is copy-pasted from the Law. I hope that you know that the US federal laws are not copyright protected.)

In my case I've written three sentences where the one is supported by a Queer.at article the other two by a National Catholic Reporter article.

Since my three sentences are exempted by the fair use of the copyrighted work (§107 · Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use) and not in collision with international agreements, please put back the deleted text.

Bear in mind that Wikipedia policies are by no way supplement nor complements of the US Copyright Code.

When dealing with copyright issues, instead the Wikipedia understanding of the copyright, I'd like to use WP:IGNORE (the most powerful Wikipedia rule) and the Copyright Law of the United States.

In addition, the use of the text delimiters (double quotation mark included) belongs to the language and the grammar, not to the law and the Copyright Law of the United States nowhere mentioned use of the text delimiters (implicit or explicit).

The same way the Law does not recommend nor mention "paraphrasing". Paraphrasing or rewording makes sense only if it leads to better understanding of something you already said or wrote. If you are re-wording someone's else text then you are interpreting it, which may lead to distortions and misunderstanding. Since the Law does not require re-wording anywhere and anytime the Wikipedia "paraphrase" and "close paraphrase "laws are null and void.

The college-level introduction to paraphrase class you recommended to me, is just one of many worthless classes in which might be of some interest to car dealers or to politicians.

At the end, the plagiarism is not a legal term. Something is plagiarised only if a work or part of it (which is not protected by the Law) is used without saying where it comes from and who owns it. --Taribuk (talk) 18:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording at all from the source material. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:02, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

"...stricter in some ways than copyright law itself"?? Do you understand that the US Copyright Law is above any Wikipedia policy? "Stricter" means violation of the Law, therefore such policy is legally null and void. "our fair use policy" is a nonsense it cannot supplement or replace the §107 · Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use--Taribuk (talk) 20:13, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry but that's the way the policy is written. This is a private website, and we can set our own policies, including policies that are stricter than those provided for in the law. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:24, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

"This is a private website"?? Since when? Who owns it? Who are "we"?.--Taribuk (talk) 20:38, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia is owned by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization set up in 2003. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:47, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Which way it's private? And when this "private" organisation can ignore the US laws?--Taribuk (talk) 21:15, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

We are not ignoring the law; we are following it, and adding additional restrictions of our own. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Again, who are "we" exactly? "additional restrictions of our own" are the law violations. From this "private" organisation I read:

In general[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation relies on public contributions and grants to fund its mission.[70] It is exempt from federal income tax[70][71] and from state income tax.[70][72] It is not a private foundation, and contributions to it qualify as tax-deductible charitable contributions.[70]--Taribuk (talk) 21:26, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

I've already explained to the best of my ability my rationale for removing your copyright violation and don't have anything further to add. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:30, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) (edit conflict) Private foundation vs. public charity is a tax question under US law. It has no impact on the private nature of the WMF or any impact of copyright law. TonyBallioni (talk) 21:35, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

@TonyBallioni "on the private nature of the WMF or any impact of copyright law"!! I have no idea what are you talking about.--Taribuk (talk) 01:44, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

The WMF is a Private Sector company, in that it is not owned by any government. Wikipedia is wholly owned by the Foundation, and so is considered Private Property, even though it is accessible by anyone. Being Private Property allows WP to define its own Terms of Service. You are correct in that it cannot violate Federal or State copyright laws, which it doesn't: anything illegal under copyright law is illegal here. But since it sets its own TOS, it can add on any restrictions it sees fit, which it does by adding in restrictions that aren't in the Copyright laws. Just as you are allowed to restrict any speech you wish in your own home, WP is free to set any inclusion criteria it wishes. It could theoretically ban the word "Wombat" if it so felt the desire. Crow^Caw 17:22, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

@ Crow. You have a big problem here: you do not know what are you talking about.--Taribuk (talk) 19:57, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Hello Diannaa: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, -- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 19:53, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:11, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas Diannaa!!

Hi Diannaa, I wish you and your family a very Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year,
Thanks for all your help and contributions on the 'pedia! ,
–Davey2010 ^{Merry Xmas / Happy New Year} 13:27, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:30, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Song Lyric vandalism copyvio

Hello Dianna, Here An IP copied in the lyrics of a copyrighted song. Thanks, L3X1 (distænt write) 14:37, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hi L3X1, you can request revdel of those by using Template:Copyvio-revdel as I've done there now. Thanks for patrolling! Crow^Caw 17:13, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Rev-del complete. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:50, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

RevDel need

Copy pasted from this source. - Mar11 (talk) 18:31, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Done - thank you for reporting. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:56, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Bormann

The page that he is called an atheist is available to view. You need to scroll up a bit though. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 45.114.118.154 (talk) 21:54, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

I couldn't view it at all. Sometimes people in one country can see it and other countries not. I am in Canada. But now I try again, and it's there. I will format the citation to match the existing style. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:01, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

ho, ho, ho

Thanks! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:14, 23 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays

From Stave one of Dickens A Christmas Carol

Old Marley was as dead as a door-nail. Mind! I don’t mean to say that I know, of my own knowledge, what there is particularly dead about a door-nail. I might have been inclined, myself, to regard a coffin-nail as the deadest piece of ironmongery in the trade. But the wisdom of our ancestors is in the simile; and my unhallowed hands shall not disturb it, or the Country’s done for. You will therefore permit me to repeat, emphatically, that Marley was as dead as a door-nail.

So you see even Charles was looking for a reliable source :-) Thank you for your contributions to the 'pedia. ~ MarnetteD|Talk 00:44, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you and Seasons Greetings! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:47, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

You are most welcome D. I hope I gave proper attribution to avoid any copyvio :-D MarnetteD|Talk 01:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Harrison Stewart Photos

What the hell kind of proof do you need? He and his parents provided the photos to me personally can we cut through the nonsense? If not what do you need to keep these pictures? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lion1407 (talk • contribs) 03:34, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Lion1407. We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the photos to be uploaded to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:16, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Kannur International Airport

HI Diannaa. I have tried my best to remove some puffery from this article. But I do suspect this article to be either copy-pasted or paraphrased from sources. Unfortunately, I do not have the time to go through the complete article off late. I request you to have a look when you are free. Thanks, — LeoFrank ^Talk 06:56, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I did find a little more copyvio. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:48, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry, Merry...

...Christmas to you in the "Great White North". As always, thanks for all your time and hard work herein. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 16:51, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Best wishes to you as well. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:53, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Seasons' Greetings

...to you and yours, from Canada's Great White North! FWiW Bzuk (talk) 21:03, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you! Best to you as well. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:02, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Diannaa,

I am very surprised that you deleted some of my edits. I don`t know what did I wrong. There are many Wikipedia articles which refer to the same sources. Please could you explain detailed which mistakes I did. I even can`t see which content you deleted. I think you deleted these sentences about the Arabic lessons in the schools in Turkey:

(Redacted)

I cited these sentences and I added the source. It was a DIRECT QUOTATIONS which means I didn`t change the content at all. Or is it only allowed to use INDIRECT QUOTATIONS on Wikipedia? In academic theses it is allowed to use DIRECT QUOTATIONS as well as INDIRECT QUOTATIONS. Or should I add quotation marks "..." at the beginning and end of this passage? Would it be allowed to add this content if I change these sentences to an INDIRECT QUOTATIONS?

I would be very happy if you reply.

Best regards,

Tom — Tom112233 (talk) 10:18, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

The material was not in quotation marks, so sorry, and was removed as a copyright violation. If copyright violations can be found elsewhere on this wiki, that's not a reason to add more. What you need to do is write the material in your own words please. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:01, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa,

Thank you very much for your reply. I apologize that I forgot the quotation marks at the quotation. I will change this DIRECT QUOTATION to an INDIRECT QUOTATION. My main concern is content and not formalities. Nevertheless, I am sorry for my mistake and thank you for your explanation.

Best regards,

Tom — Tom112233 (talk) 11:55, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Technology Review cite

Hello, the edit you removed from Adolf Hitler as a copyright violation was cited to the source you say was copied. I believe my edit was sufficiently different from the source, but cannot prove it because the edit is no longer accessible by non-administrators. Ylee (talk) 23:02, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I have sent you a copy via email. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:06, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

I have to get ready to go out now so if you have any further questions or comments I will have to get back to you later. 🎄 — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:08, 24 December 2017 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Hello Diannaa: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, —MRD2014 ^{Merry Christmas!} 01:58, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:50, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

	Season's greetings!
	I hope this holiday season is festive and fulfilling and filled with love and kindness, and that 2018 will be safe, successful and rewarding...Modernist (talk) 12:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC) (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:51, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

EPM IP socks?

Hi. Back in April, you reverted edits on Ahnenpass by User:88.109.64.25. User:92.29.153.231 and User:2.97.224.21 as being by English Patriot Man. Now, another IP, User:93.224.100.106, which geolocates to the same place, is edit-warring on the same article, with the same POV (that the Nazis considered Slavs to be Aryans). I've reported the new sock at EWN, but if you agree that it is an EPM socks, tit can can probably just be blocked. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:07, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Blocked by Acroterion. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:41, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

RvDel request

Copy paste from Banglapedia. - Mar11 (talk) 05:33, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Revision deletion complete. Thanks for reporting, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:03, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

Harper Adams University

Hello Diannaa, the history section especially appears to have large sections copied from the school's website. Perhaps you can better determine what must be removed and rev/deleted. And by the way, wishing you a very happy new year, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:57, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Some of it was added a while ago. All finished — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:33, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

There will be a toast proffered in your honor. Thank you and cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 03:20, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

new article, new user

hi, Diannaa... thank you for your notice on copyright issue regarding a photo added to wiki page on Ben_Nowland. I am working on fixing it. Ben is a friend and asked me to change the photo on his page. MORE IMPORTANTLY... I have been working on creating my first wikipedia page and it is ready to be reviewed.... as a new user, I just can't figure out how to do that. Would appreciate your expertise!

Draft:SFC Jacob E. Schlereth

What do I do next? I have done my best to copy/edit code from existing articles on similar subjects. I have already created the proper OGG version of the thumbnail video, but cannot upload it until it is connected to an approved article. Thankful for your support and guidance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timarnold72 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello Timarnold72. I see you have submitted your draft for review. Now you will have to wait; the process is severely backlogged and there's 2,500 drafts in the queue. In the meantime you might like to check over your draft using the material at WP:Your first article. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:02, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Happy New Year! Timarnold72 (talk) 18:23, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Upload permissions granted

Hi Diannaa, you flagged a picture I uploaded stating no permissions. As I wrote on the descriptions, the photo was sent to me directly by the person in the image, whom I know personally in real life. He gave me the permission to upload it for this purpose. Is there something specific I have to type into the image description? Thanks for the help. El Cool (talk) 06:39, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holder has given permission for the material to be copied to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:03, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Fenimore Art Museum

Hello Diannaa, a presumed employee of the museum has been working on this article, and cut and pasted content from his sources directly onto the page [17], saved the version and then rewrote and paraphrased it (one source, for example, is here [18]. The first question is whether the intermediate version needs to be rev/deleted, then whether the current version has any remaining issues. Now that I think of it, an earlier version I reverted yesterday had these issues, as well [19]. As always, your expertise is appreciated. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 23:23, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

There appears to still be some overlap with the source webpage but it's impossible to say for sure if it was copied from there, since the source webpage was never archived. I have removed some more copyvio and potential copyvio and will do revision deletion of the more recent additions. Thanks for stopping by, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Diannaa. And since copyright infringement never takes a holiday, please look into Gregg S. Fisher at your leisure. I removed some dubious passages while others were paring promotional content as well. Very best, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 15:17, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

This one has also been cleaned now, as well as further chopping done. I had to work today, parked in the underground parking, as the temperature is −30 °C (−22 °F) today. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:38, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

And I thought it was cold here, where the temps are between zero and twenty. Dress warmly and throw an extra large coat over the car. Thank you. 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 20:49, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Daniel Bombardier File permission problem

Hello Diannaa,

First I would like to wish you a Happy New Year. I understand that the images on the Daniel Bombardier Wikipedia page ware removed due to no copyright permissions. I have since contacted the Artist and received a permission email from him to use his images on his Wikipedia Page. I sent the email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and wondering if their is still an issue and how I can resolve it. Please let me know what I can do to get these images back on his Wikipedia page. Thank you so much in advance, C. David Novak — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdavidnovak (talk • contribs) 01:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

The OTRS team is experiencing severe backlogs and it may take a while for your case to be reviewed. I am not an OTRS volunteer and do not have access to their email queue. You might consider posting at Wikipedia:OTRS noticeboard. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:19, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Is it possible to upload the pictures again with the email giving approval? Thanks, David — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cdavidnovak (talk • contribs) 01:50, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

That's not how it works. The email itself has to be forwarded to the OTRS team via email, not copied onto the file description page. The instructions are at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:05, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Vinod Vashisht

Hi Diannaa. Can you please look over the history of Vinod Vashisht. Material from here has been copied into it right from the start (I don't know if Government of India press releases are PD) and a chunk of text from somewhere has been recently added to it (and reverted). --NeilN ^{talk to me} 06:13, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Their website says "The material must be reproduced accurately and not used in a derogatory manner or in a misleading context" which I have always taken to be not liberal enough a license for our purposes, since our license has no such restriction. Regarding the huge block of text, I am unable to find a copy of it anywhere online (checking both manually and with Earwig's tool) so I have not done revision deletion on those edits. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for looking. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 15:20, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Seeking help with camera manual links

Hi Diannaa. I thought you might be able to help me get some response to Wikipedia talk:Copyrights#External links to camera manuals from Butkus.org and Cameramanuals.org. Maybe a different venue for discussion? I'm concerned that the the scans of the manuals have their copyright statements removed, and sometimes a copyright is added for the organization doing the scanning. --Ronz (talk) 17:25, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I have posted a reply at User talk:Butkusmi#Moving forward - copyrights: The original publisher of each manual is the copyright holder of that material. Here at Wikipedia we don't base our copyright decisions on whether or not the copyright holder cares any more or whether or not we think we will get caught. Our policy is stricter than that. We're not permitted to violate copyright law, and we're not permitted to add external links that display material that violates someone's copyright in violation of copyright law. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:45, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

I've now finished removing these links. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:21, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Did you see the copyright concerns I posted to User talk:Ciliatedflower?

The editor says they are not close paraphrase, but I've copied the text and source to their talk page and it looks like it to me. Doug Weller talk 17:50, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Sorry, the ping failed to work. Spot checks of the sections on the 50s-60s and 70s show the content is very close to the source document in many ways, presenting the same material in the same order using very similar wording. This goes beyond just a list of chronological events and hence is copyrightable in my opinion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:57, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Diannaa!

Happy New Year!

Diannaa,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
-- ψλ ● ✉ ✓ 23:08, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:25, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Murder of Heather Rich

Hi. Can you give Murder of Heather Rich‎ a look-over and add it to your watchlist please? Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 18:19, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

What am I supposed to be looking for? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Just figured a female eye checking an article about a female victim was a good idea. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 20:21, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

New Years new page backlog drive

Hello Diannaa, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Announcing the NPP New Year Backlog Drive!

We have done amazing work so far in December to reduce the New Pages Feed backlog by over 3000 articles! Now is the time to capitalise on our momentum and help eliminate the backlog!

The backlog drive will begin on January 1^st and run until January 29^th. Prize tiers and other info can be found HERE.

Awards will be given in tiers in two categories:

The total number of reviews completed for the month.
The minimum weekly total maintained for all four weeks of the backlog drive.

NOTE: It is extremely important that we focus on quality reviewing. Despite our goal of reducing the backlog as much as possible, please do not rush while reviewing.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. — TonyBallioni (talk) 20:24, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

May Mann

I am sure I edited the article a long time back. Can't even recall what I did. But, it would be nice if I could re-incorporate the stuff. Can you send the content to me via e-mail? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 13:05, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Content was added from https://findingaid.lib.byu.edu/viewItem/MSS%201449. Someone recently added more from the same source, which is how I happened to notice your edit. I am sending via email the two copied paragraphs you had added. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:14, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. You are a lifesaver.

The tool you are using to find plagiarism, how can I use it? Is it not better that I find my plagiarism before you do? Otherwise it is a lot of hassle already. Also, it is much easier to edit on Wikipedia than with a word processor like MS Word. And, finally, it is good to have forewarning, not sudden deletion. Since Wikipedia staunchly refuses to do any forewarning, I am ready to do it myself. Surely I don't remember every laziness that I ever did. But, I need a tool first. :D

Looking that maple leaf, are you from Canada? I met a Canadian TV producer recently. He was wonderful. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 13:23, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

We have a bot that checks edits over a certain size and files a report. There's a tool https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/ that can be used to check for copyvio from other websites. But you're not supposed to add copyvio to this website, not even temporarily for editing; the material needs to be copyright compliant before you save the edit. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Purdue or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:27, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

I completely understand that part (though copy-vio and plagiarism is not the same thing. for instance, small bits copied ditto is not copy-vio by the law). Funnily Wikipedia does not put this rule of "shoot at sight" upfront, as part of the core diktats (for media copy-vios Wikipedia does not delete without a warning). And, hence I might have done more of that. I want to correct every bit of copy-vio or plagiarism I may have done. Now it seems Wikipedia doesn't even want someone to do that chance.

No help. No warning. no attempt to aware editors. Not a very good policy it seems.

BTW, the text you sent has no inlines. Can you send again with the inlines? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 13:36, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself. We're not allowed to copy any part of the source document, not even small bits; everything you add here needs to be written in your own words. Copyright violations are a serious problem with legal considerations, and must be dealt with promptly. It's not an occasional problem: there's anywhere from 75 to 100 potential violations to be assessed each day. Since there's only a very small group of people working on copyright cleanup, discussion of each individual violation is not practical. The policy is to remove it. Copyvio images are eligible for deletion (Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#F9. Unambiguous copyright infringement) as soon as they are discovered; photos that are uploaded with no evidence of permission (Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#F11. No evidence of permission) are deleted after a week. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:47, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

May be I can join you. If I can cleanup my mess, I can do that for others too. I believe a lot of copy-vio comes from ignorance, or, like me, laziness. A little copy-edit would probably rectify most of them. Though May Mann looks like a very bad case. Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 15:22, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Some baklava for you!

Thanks for the WMF tool. It works wonderfully, and I already have found some copy-vio (not just plagiarism) done by me. Let's see if I can return the stolen property before I get caught. : D Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 13:44, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Another question (sorry for being very annoying) - the WMF tool shows something it calls confidence. Is higher confidence good, or lower confidence good? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 15:18, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

The higher the number, the more likely there's copyvio. However, these numbers are only a rough guide – all overlapping material should be manually examined and any copyright violations removed. It's okay to leave in simple un-rewordable things like job titles, book titles, alphabetical lists, and so on. All other overlapping wording should be re-worded or removed. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:26, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

The overlapping words are marked with colour. Right? Aditya^{(talk • contribs)} 15:36, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Yes. On my display, they are highlighted in pink. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:58, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

COPYVIO

Diannaa, would you mind please reviewing the recent history at Turkey and letting me know if it is a COPYVIO? I rewrote it in my own words, significantly revising the order and structure of the sentences and thoughts, but I received a COPYVIO warning on my talk page and would appreciate if you could offer your opinion on whether the warning is justified. I pinged you to the discussion on my talk page. Seraphim System ^(talk) 19:27, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

replied there - twice. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:28, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

The only part I see that is even close is "Effective missionaries..." and the church lost its property which is close to the source. The rest is my own writing. Would it be enough to just remove the last line? Seraphim System ^(talk) 19:31, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

I revised it, can you let me know if it is still a problem? Seraphim System ^(talk) 19:34, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Please stop editing the page; I am trying to remove the copyvio and am getting an edit conflict. Stop spreading the discussion over multiple pages. I've already commented multiple times on your talk page; please post your comments there instead of running a parallel thread here. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:38, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

[1] ttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:LabIndia&diff=prev&oldid=815045325

[1]