Jump to content

User talk:Diannaa/Archive 74

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 70←Archive 72Archive 73Archive 74Archive 75Archive 76→Archive 80

Emerald Tablet

Dear Diannaa,

First of all, I wish you a very happy new year.

I noticed that you removed a translation taken from a 1979 work I added to Emerald Tablet. I should like to think that this kind of citation would fall under fair use:

- it only cites a very small part of the translated text (the text of the tablet is always embedded in much larger works), so the use is not very substantial.

- it does not also copy the notes and comments in the original, so it does not render the original less valuable for purposes of commercial exploitation (which, because of its academic nature, is very slight in the first place).

- It also most clearly serves the advancement of general knowledge. Frankly, putting together different versions and translations of an obscure text like the Emerald Tablet has the potential of transforming its understanding even by subject specialists, who too often rely on one or two late versions, and who have no encyclopedic source (nor even secondary literature) to turn to. It is precisely this type of thing that makes digital resources like Wikipedia so wonderful. This innovative use in Wiki voice is clearly transformative.

- There is a very explicit acknowledgement of the copyrighted source: the name of the translator is cited in full in the article, and there is a full reference in the footnote.

So, based on these arguments, I would like to ask you to reconsider whether we can cite modern translations of this important historical text, for the sole purpose of improving understanding.

More specifically, I would like to add translations taken from the following sources:

Litwa, M. David 2018. Hermetica II: The Excerpts of Stobaeus, Papyrus Fragments, and Ancient Testimonies in an English Translation with Notes and Introductions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Steele, Robert and Singer, Dorothea Waley 1928. “The Emerald Table” in: Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 21, pp. 41–57/485–501.

Zirnis, Peter 1979. The Kitāb Usṭuqus al-uss of Jābir ibn Ḥayyān. PhD diss., New York University.

Of those, especially David Litwa's work is very important, since it contains a translation of the oldest extant Latin translation (by Hugo of Santalla), which is especially enlightening to those accustomed only to Renaissance and modern occultist versions.

Let me know what you think,

Kind regards,

Apaugasma (talk) 22:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

We have other translations; if you think it's important enough you should say why it's unique in the article rather than copy-pasting it in without context or commentary.— Diannaa (talk) 23:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi again. I added Steele and Singer's 1928 translation of the most widely divulged Latin version to the article. I think it should be OK under fair use. Especially the contextual significance and no free equivalent in WP:NFC strongly apply: the quoted content is the very subject of the article, and there is no free translation of the Latin vulgate available. I have also updated the article to put somewhat more stress on the existence of multiple different medieval versions, which should make it clear that Newton's translation (the only free English translation of a Latin version) is really only a translation of the text as it existed in the late 17th century. If you disagree, please remove the translation I added (my last edit) from Wikipedia. Many thanks, Apaugasma (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. First of all, Happy New Year! When you have time, can you check out History of science and technology in Japan please? Thank you. Here's what I've found so far:

Bamnamu (talk) 02:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Please remove the copyright violations and then request revision deletion using the template {{Copyvio-revdel}}— Diannaa (talk) 04:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Understood. Thank you. Bamnamu (talk) 05:54, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, very helpful of you to take care of this one.— Diannaa (talk) 12:19, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Mahar Regiment

In Overview section you reverted my work..!

Quotes given by some scholar must be copied as it is one can not change it . And most of the content I wrote by myself. I am adding the content back don't revert it .

I have also added overview discussion on talk page of Mahar Regiment share your thoughts there. 

Ghoshpreet singh (talk) 03:53, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found. You will immediately see why the extent of the overlap led me to remove it all.— Diannaa (talk) 04:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)


Okay but due to quotes there will be overlap, about remaining contents I will improve it and will try to write it in my own words as much as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4042:291:C3FE:8C4B:8C3B:5F32:8704 (talk) 07:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Sambavar page hidden

Sambavar is the group of people who are living in kanyakumari district majorly. they are not parayers but they have connections with them. Uthiransambavar (talk) 07:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Thank you for your comment on the page - Judd L. Teller. I Just removed a large section per your alert. Though I'm relatively new I just rechecked so that it meets all guidelinesHistomisus (talk) 12:43, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I have done some more cleanup.— Diannaa (talk) 12:54, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

See this page of youtuber Maridhas, the person who created this today is kown for copy pasting. The entire page the content is copy pasted from the sources. The remaining has no source. He also sourced the persons own books and and own website. The image is also stolen from facebook. Nearly everything is copied from www.organiser.org/Encyc/2020/7/22/Karuppar-Kottam-controversy-in-Tamil-Nadu-exposes-DMKs-Hindu-hatred.html 2409:4072:508:DEC2:BDEC:9BD5:6AC5:A91B (talk) 18:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

I have cleaned the article. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 01:10, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Again this guy is copying paragraphs from the sources Draft:Tamil Nadu Startup. 2409:4072:508:DEC2:1B33:96F1:7A08:52AC (talk) 06:15, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

I have deleted the draft and given a final warning.— Diannaa (talk) 11:51, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Looks like he is paid editing for a new phone. Look at the section User:Cyzkumar responded in teahouse. 2409:4072:639B:EA7D:BA32:617:B9E3:F629 (talk) 18:19, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I just wanted to let you know that very little of the content in Volcanism on the Moon was copied from Moon. The only content I copied from there was on 5 January and is in the "Recent activity" section. I have since given attribution to the proper articles. Volcanoguy 03:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

User:KingBaudoin

Hello, Diannaa,

This editor has a historical speech on their user page which admin The Earwig deleted as they judged it to be infringing copyright but the editor disputes this conclusion. As our resident expert on copyright, I think your opinion on this would be helpful if you had a spare moment. Thanks! Liz Read! Talk! 23:36, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

It's obvious that it's a quotation, so it's not a violation of copyright. But it's an inappropriate use of the user page in my opinion, but I'm not sure if it qualifies for U5 speedy deletion. MFD might be the way to go.— Diannaa (talk) 23:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! Liz Read! Talk! 02:44, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:31, 4 January 2021 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 01:31, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, as always. BilCat (talk) 04:00, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Deleted my content

You deleted content on my DreamAhead College Investment Plan page, citing copyright. I have made some additions to your revised draft for your review. None of the text is copied or reused, and all statements are cited. thanks RodgerWA529 (talk) 20:20, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

I have cleaned your draft again. There was still a lot of copying. — Diannaa (talk) 11:49, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

OK, some of the content you deleted this time, you had left in the previous draft. I've added important content back in to the overview area (your edit left it incomplete) and added a re-written description of the investment options.RodgerWA529 (talk) 19:00, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations § Huge quotes in citations

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Copyright violations § Huge quotes in citations. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:17, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. Would mind taking a look at this? Perhaps you can help sort things out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:18, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Commented— Diannaa (talk) 11:39, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:16, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Laurier (talk) 06:55, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

(It's about a privacy violation, so it's fairly urgent; thanx in advance.)

Reverted edit

You reverted my entire edit to an article instead of the supposedly offending section. I would like to draw your attention to the following: Revert only when necessary. Reverting tends to be hostile, making editing Wikipedia unpleasant. Good reasons to revert include vandalism.

My edit did not constitute vandalism. Please think more carefully before you perform the same action again.

Thank you. Djp.mortimer (talk) 15:06, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@Djp.mortimer: I did not remove your edit. Someone else removed it. I did remove the edit from the page history though; that was done because you added copyright content copied from https://www.historytoday.com/shot-through-eye-and-who%E2%80%99s-blame. Please don't add copyright text to Wikipedia. — Diannaa (talk) 15:10, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

@Diannaa:

That website does not own the copyright to the content, it is an extract from a book, which I fully sourced and referenced within the edit.

Djp.mortimer (talk) 15:15, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Copying from a book is not allowed either, whether you include a citation or not.— Diannaa (talk) 15:17, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your input on my edit

Hi DIannaa, thank you for the input on my edit on the Information Technology Act 2000 page. Will keep your comments in mind the next time i make any edits.

0x3456e00b (talk) 15:31, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

2021

I tried to give 2021 a good start by updating the QAI project topics. Please check and correct, - not a member, but an old friend! - For moar private "happy new year" see here. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Gerda! Happy New Year. Thursday, January 7 is Orthodox Christmas Day 2021 in Ukraine, so Merry Christmas, too.— Diannaa (talk) 20:28, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
The Main page informs us today about Little Christmas, - we call it Dreikönig (Three Kings), and you may have seen in the moar private link that I had great musical experiences listening to cantata services at a church of that name. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:04, 6 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi! You wrote a message in my User Talk page with the title "Copyright problem on Inheritance" about an edition I made. First of all I want to apologize for this inconvenient as I'm not able yet to recognize these cases. You said "While the original document is public domain, the translation is not." so I was thinking that if we change the cite for one that has the original document there should not be any problem while we don't keep the content literally equal to the one of the page from where I copy this content. If not, I think we can ask for a traslation in ru.wikipedia but I don't know how it is done.

Angel Millo (talk) 23:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Changing the citation does not mean we are at liberty to make a copy of someone's copyright material. I hope that's not what you meant? We need to make our own translation, not just copy one from elsewhere. Using a Google translation is not allowed either.— Diannaa (talk) 00:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Mmmm... well... i don't speak russian. I think we can ask for a traslation in ru.wikipedia but how do we do that? How can we "publish" a request to being seen by many .ru users? Angel Millo (talk) 01:29 7 January 2021 (UTC)
There may be Russian speaking people on this wiki that you could ask.— Diannaa (talk) 13:21, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello again. Certainly but how do I contact them? Where can I find those people?

Angel Millo (talk) 07:45 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Category:User ru-4— Diannaa (talk) 14:19, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! Angel Millo (talk) 13:07 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Copyright Material- Carrollton High School (Carrollton, Georgia)

Hello Diannaa! I apologise for the issues with the aforementioned page. As you can see I am still inexperienced at editing and am trying to improve. I will work to find sourced material for the page and not simply use other material. Thank you for you input!

EmperorKen (talk) 00:07, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Reckless Removal on Your Part

Dear Admin with all due to respect you removed hours of my work in Pashto Grammar which I added and edited from three different grammar books (whose references were added in Further Reading I might add]. Please note I am re-adding the information again spending hours of my time for the benefit of wikipedia; please note this time: 1. I am adding references 2. I am changing words 3. I am adding my own words 4. I am changing structure of organisation So that the info can not be removed on copyright issues.

If you had just asked me in my talk page i would have gladly re-edited the page - instead in you removed it within one second which is taking me hours to re-add. P

PashtoAdder4 (talk) 11:01, 8 January 2021 (UTC)]

If you still have a problem with a sentence please remove that specific section and let me know - not the whole. I have put alot of my own examples in as well. It takes hours changing keyboards between english, pashto and ipa. PashtoAdder4 (talk) 13:00, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
The content you added was copied for the most part from https://pt.scribd.com/document/313466504/Descriptive-Grammer-Of-Pushto-pdf in October and again in January. (Click on the Ithenticate links to view the overlap). If you add content written in your own words, I won't have to remove it.— Diannaa (talk) 13:31, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes I am adding it in my own words and referencing - my comments in each edit summary are now given. Please also compare the versions from the three grammar books i have used=

1. https://books.google.com.pk/books?id=wS7nBQAAQBAJ&source=gbs_book_other_versions


2. https://books.google.com.pk/books?id=KToHywAACAAJ&dq=pashto+grammar&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjus7Phw4zuAhWUXsAKHQA5AhEQ6AEwAHoECAIQAg


3. https://books.google.com.pk/books?id=bQGVvQEACAAJ&dq=pashto+grammar+tegey&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiiq4Huw4zuAhWTmFwKHfAMBI4Q6AEwAXoECAAQAQ


PashtoAdder4 (talk) 14:20, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Please check out the new edits PashtoAdder4 (talk) 14:30, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Ye So-ya

Hi greeting! I'm creator of Draft:Ye So-ya. You allegedly removed some content in this article as copyvio. This was not a copyvio and came from the 2007 version of Jumong article, see that page's edit history here. The website copied the whole article is dated 2007. I'm sure this is most likely a WP:MIRROR. I'm sorry, I forgot to put (WP:CWW) in the page's edit summary. Please kindly restore the content that you removed in the article. Thanks 136.228.175.16 (talk) 17:41, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I have undone the revision deletion but I am not going to re-add the content, because it's unsourced.— Diannaa (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Christopher Le Brun

Hi, can you please check out the above article as am having problems with an editor re-adding copyvio before the previous copyvio has been rev deleted, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 02:15, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

 Done— Diannaa (talk) 16:31, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Early European modern humans

Hi! I'm currently reviewing the Early European modern humans article and the Earwig's Copyvio Detector indicated that it found a high probability match ([1]). However, I'm quite unsure if this is right because the website pointed to by the tool well, seems odd. It appears to consist of random texts including a (near) verbatim passage found in the reviewed article. The site does not appear to be a typical mirror, but I don't know what to make of it. Should I just disregard results such as this or not? Thanks.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:09, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

The webpage contains snippets from Wikipedia as well as from journal articles and weird commentary. Our article has undergone a complete rewrite by a trustworthy editor since July so although the Wayback Machine has never archived the suspected source webpage I can pretty much guarantee that this is a false positive.— Diannaa (talk) 13:19, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I realized this must be a false positive, I just wondered if I should record the website someplace as a false positive.--Tomobe03 (talk) 16:59, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
You can add a Template:Backwards copy to the article talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 17:17, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Content attribution

Hi Dianna - I discovered that most of this is directly copied from here. I read their commons license and have filled in the article cn's with cite details. Do you think that is sufficient to satisfy attribution? Regards CV9933 (talk) 16:01, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

CV9933, Sorry but the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-commercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License is not a compatible license, because it does not allow commercial use, and our license does. The content was added with this diff. We can tell by the lack of proper formatting that it's a copypaste. Have a quick look before I remove it and perform revision deletion.— Diannaa (talk) 16:13, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay - thanks for your quick response. CV9933 (talk) 16:17, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
Regarding adding attribution, there's a couple of ways to do it. You can do it manually like I did here or you can use the {{CC-notice}} template. — Diannaa (talk) 16:20, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
A useful tip - thanks. CV9933 (talk) 16:28, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Reckless Removal on Your Part again

Dear Admin with all due to respect you removed hours of my work If you had just asked me in my talk page I would have gladly re-edited the page - instead in you removed it within one second which is taking me hours to re-add. P Australianblackbelt (talk) 18:31, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 18:36, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Georgina Long content edit

Hi Diana I am new to Wikipedia. I work at the Melanoma Institute Australia for Georgina Long and Richard Scolyer. I have been asked by them to update the content on their Wikipedia page. They provided me with their CV, awards and image to be used. I added but you have now removed. Can you please provide some guidance to me on how I can do this. They are very specific on the info they want included on their own pages. I cannot paraphrase their awards, achievements and titles as they are quite specific. Please advise how I can manage this. I need to do this urgently for Georgina Long and Richard Scolyer. Mia Varley (talk) 10:17, 10 January 2021 (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 or the copyright holder has verbally given you 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 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 yourself or your employer 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. Another user has posted some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page.
The subject of a Wikipedia article does not get to dictate what the article says. Wikipedia is based on reliable secondary sources such as newspapers, reliable websites, and the like. While job titles and the names of awards don't need to be re-worded, it's not okay to copy-paste material from people's CVs or their employer's website. — Diannaa (talk) 14:25, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Please refer to my talk page for my reply.

Not much to type here. Just the subject line is good enough. Bodhiupasaka (talk) 15:04, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Doane Family Association of America

You've made a mistake by deleting the Doane Family Association of America. It is EXACTLY the same ty[e of organization as The Jamestowne Society, The Mayflower Society and hundreds more. It was very clear in the first paragraph that this organization was a non-profit. This is VERY UPSETTING — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarderDimi (talk • contribs) 15:09, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

The main reason I deleted it was because pretty much everything was copied from the organization's website. You can't do that, because it's a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Regarding the notability issue, please see WP:Notability (organizations and companies) as to how to determine whether or not an organization meets our notablilithy requirements. The main point is there should be extensive detailed coverage of the organization in multiple independent secondary sources such as newspapers, reliable websites, and the like.— Diannaa (talk) 15:17, 10 January 2021 (UTC)


First, None of the material is copyrighted None. Intentionally so. I'm a member of the association.

Second, your explanation is diiferent from what you published. I AM NOT A FIRST TIME author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarderDimi (talk • contribs) 15:22, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

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.
Another 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.
Finally, the notice on your talk page was placed by a different editor. They mentioned the lack of notability, and when I reviewed the article I noticed there was also a copyright issue, so I added that rationale to the deletion. See the log entries to review my deletion rationales, which includes the nominator's rationale as well as my own.— Diannaa (talk) 15:35, 10 January 2021 (UTC)


I'm done. No more contributions from me. No more donations.

You are not consistent with your policies. I find hundreds of pages where the policies you cite are ignored. You've decided to attack this page out of spite. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CarderDimi (talk • contribs) 15:45, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dianna. Certainly didn't intend to violate any copyright. Thank you for catching and correcting the problematic text! Brakoholic (talk) 19:32, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Problematic IP Address User: Blanking of Content

Hello, Diannaa. I'd like to report IP Address user 80.195.7.194 for persistently blanking content on the page Balochistan cricket team. Your soonest response to this concern is highly appreciated. TheHonchoMindset (talk) 03:31, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Jeffrey Sprecher Content Deletion

You deleted my additions to the section, Stock sales during COVID-19 pandemic. My first paragraph came directly from reference 14 of the page. My second paragraph was taken form this public article on Politico https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/16/senate-ethics-committee-drops-probe-loeffler-stock-trades-323795.

Can you please explain why? Fgbwashdc (talk) 19:34, 11 January 2021 (UTC)Fgbwashdc

"Publicly available" and "in the public domain" are not the same thing. The source webpage is marked as "© 2021 POLITICO LLC" and their terms of use page indicates that " The materials available through this Site are our property of or the property of our affiliates or licensors, and are protected by copyright, trademark and other intellectual property laws." This means that to add text copied from there is a violation of our copyright policy. Almost everything on the Internet is protected by copyright.— Diannaa (talk) 19:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

That is also true for CNBC, reference 14, which is copyrighted material. So that, too, should be deleted, ie., the second paragraph in the Stick Sales section. Fgbwashdc (talk) 19:14, 13 January 2021 (UTC)Fgbwashdc

Thanks

[2] Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:46, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Jessica Wallenfels

Is it possible to get access to some of the deleted/hidden material? I'm now rewriting heavily, but missing a lot of my citations and research, not just the problematic sections - I had pasted some to my sandbox but it's mostly missing there too. Thanks. --HistoricalAccountings (talk) 23:03, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

I will have to send it to you via email because copyright material is not allowed anywhere on Wikipedia, not even in sandboxes or drafts.— Diannaa (talk) 23:14, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Received. Thank you! --HistoricalAccountings (talk) 23:22, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
The content in your sandbox was the same as the material you had pasted onto the article talk page. Sent in the first email.— Diannaa (talk) 23:26, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Do you take pride in deleting other people's contributions?

Hello Diannaa, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Diannaa

I second this!!! I am another user deeply affected by this user who is the biggest mistake on Wikipedia!!! - User Moolaramovijatahe Moolaramovijayathe (talk) 04:45, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

1. I know one of your surrogates (or maybe yourself) will delete this post, and may start attacking me, but I know someone needs to be brave enough to stand up to your selective and punitive deletions that fly in the face of US fair use law.

2. I also know that Jimmy Wales and the main body at Wikipedia support these deletions.

3. I have seen first hand what happens to people that go up against people in power against people like yourself, but someone has to speak up, because your deletions are detrimental to Wikipedia as a whole.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Active_measures#A_significant_portion_of_what_I_added_to_this_article_was_deleted_by_User%3ADiannaa 

== A significant portion of what I added to this article was deleted by User:Diannaa ==

A significant portion of what I added to this article was deleted by User:Diannaa

The article in question which all references were deleted in this article, can by found here:

“One has not only a legal, but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” -- Martin Luther King Jr.

Infinitepeace (talk) 04:55, 12 January 2021 (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. — Diannaa (talk) 12:50, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Jeffrey Sprecher

The text that I was trying to add is in the public domain. One paragraph links to the exact same story, reference 14, and the second paragraph to an article on Politico.com. These two paragraphs make it clear that he and his wife, Ms. Loeffler, were not investigated by the DOJ nor the Senate Ethic Committee. Not adding them leaves the impression that they are under investigation. That's not true. That leaves the Wikipedia page incomplete.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fgbwashdc (talk • contribs) to my user page

@Fgbwashdc: The content I removed was copied from Politico and CNBC. Neither of these websites is in the public domain: "© 2021 POLITICO LLC; The materials available through this Site are our property of or the property of our affiliates or licensors, and are protected by copyright, trademark and other intellectual property laws." "© 2021 CNBC LLC. All Rights Reserved." — Diannaa (talk) 19:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

But then isn't that also true for this paragraph, "On March 20, 2020, the consumer advocacy group Common Cause filed complaints against Sprecher and Loeffler with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the United States Senate Ethics Committee, and the United States Justice Department, requesting from the latter a criminal investigation of the couple for violations of the STOCK Act," which is also taken from CNBC (reference #14, the very same article that I used and you deleted." @Fgbwashdc — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.28.194.216 (talk) 19:03, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

That's not a match: compare— Diannaa (talk) 20:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

And what about the text from the Politico.com article you removed? It's the very same article as reference #6 in Kelly Loeffler titled "Senate Ethics Committee drops probe of Loeffler stoke trades." 108.28.194.216 (talk) 17:23, 14 January 2021 And note that there are some 20 Politico citations in Chuck Shumer (UTC)Fgbwashdc 108.28.194.216 (talk) 17:21, 14 January 2021 (UTC) 108.28.194.216 (talk) 17:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

What's your point? Are these copyright violations?— Diannaa (talk) 21:31, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

As for the first paragraph I tried to add, I've edited it and changed the reference: On March 20, 2020, Intercontinental Exchange said in a statement that the nearly 30 transactions involving the couple were “in compliance” with company policies. “Mr. Sprecher and Senator Loeffler have made clear that those transactions were executed by their financial advisors without Mr. Sprecher’s or Senator Loeffler’s input or direction.”[1] Does this pass muster? Thanks. Fgbwashdc (talk) 17:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)Fgbwashdc

References

  1. ^ "Intercontinental Exchange Statement on News Reports Related to Transactions by Jeffrey Sprecher and Sen. Kelly Loeffler". March 20, 2020. Retrieved Jan 14, 2021 – via theice.com.
No it does not pass muster, because changing the citation does not change the fact that it's identical to text in https://www.cnbc.com/2020/03/20/coronavirus-controversy-stock-exchange-owner-defends-sales-by-ceo-loeffler.html— Diannaa (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Maithil_Brahmin

My well sourced edits in the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maithil_Brahmin was deleted by Sitush on the plea that such details are unwanted in Wikipedia!

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maithil_Brahmin&type=revision&diff=560587461&oldid=560587307

If Sitush has no interest in this article, who gave him a right to prevent others from reading? Later, I copied those deleted portions on my wikidot website. Many years later, someone named Ashutosh Jha added those portions and you deleted them on the plea of copying copyright materials from wikidot. Ashutosh Jha perhaps did not know that the material he copied from wikidot page were originally copied to wikidot by me from my contributions to Wikipedia article Maithil_Brahmin. Sithush wrote on talk page that the sources I used were in Hindi. Unfortunately, these details were published only by two authors in book form and both books were in Hindia, no English writer ever wrote on structural divisions among Maithil Brahmins. Wikipedia prefers English but if English sources are absent other sources can be used. Sitush vandalised my work and that is why I stopped wasting my time on Wikipedia. Now, you are deleting those old Wikipedia materials again on the plea that they belong to copyright materials of wikidot! I am not going to waste my time on edit wars in Wikipedia. VJha (talk) 06:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I have undone the revision deletion, but I am not going to re-add it, because there aren't any citations. It's sourced to Wikidot, which is a Wikipedia mirror, and when Sitush removed the content he said "far too intricate in detail for this encyclopedia, and the sourcing is vague"— Diannaa (talk) 14:02, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio-revdel request

You deleted Draft:Saigon Joint Stock Commercial Bank. Would you consider giving Draft:Sai Gon Joint Stock Commercial Bank a copyvio-revdel for the same copyright violations? If not, that's okay, someone will get to the on-page pending request sooner or later. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:55, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I am busy - it's already tagged.— Diannaa (talk) 20:06, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for letting me know you are busy. I am the one who tagged it :). davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:25, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
I am getting very little help nowadays, and the revdel queue is one way to get more people involved.— Diannaa (talk) 21:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Another admin took care of it. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Revise my edit request

Hello, I looked at the feedback you provided for my article and completely reworded everything, please let me know if there are any other changes required in order to have my article be accepted. Draft: Draft:Amina Muaddi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xforeverlove24 (talk • contribs) 08:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The draft is in the queue to be reviewed. Please have a look at the notability concern; that's why it was declined the first time.— Diannaa (talk) 12:44, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

"Copyright violation"

Dear Diannaa,

thank you for your remarks concerning my edits in Jessie Saxby. In my humble opinion, it's not always clear when a text is a literal copy from a (clearly indicated) source, and when it is a citation. Next time you think that my text is too close to the (copyrighted) original, just let me know, so that I can change it, but please, don't delete it, without leaving anything behind. In Dutch we say: don't throw away the child with the bathwater (in this case: the complete link to the quoted source). Every now and then, I just work online, and I don't always have a backup of all the little additions I make. Happily not in this case, by the way. And let me be absolutely clear that I always want to change things, if you think it necessary (although it's not always easy for a non-native speaker). I did give it another try, and I hope this is alright, now. Many greetings, --Dick Bos (talk) 13:29, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Copyright issues 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, unfortunately discussion of each individual violation is not practical. Please ensure your edits comply with our copyright policy before you publish the page.— Diannaa (talk) 13:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

SFI edit

Hi Diannaa

I just made a small update to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sustainable_Forestry_Initiative page. I also used four tildes to sign my edit. Sorry to bug you with this but am I doing this correctly? Thanks Ecwwoodworth (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

You by accident removed a citation. I have re-added it. Other than that it's an ok addition from a copyright point of view, but reads like promotional copy. — Diannaa (talk) 21:27, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I think following material from sexual slavery in Islam might suffer from copyright violation. I wonder if you give me a favor and check it. Thanks!

  • material which was cited in the article:"Legal and literary documents show that those slaves used for sexual service were differentiated at slave markets from those who were intended mainly for domestic services. These slave girls were called "slaves for pleasure" (muṭʿa, ladhdha) or “slave-girls for sexual intercourse” (jawārī al-waṭ). Many female slaves became concubines to their owners and bore their children. Others were just used for sex before being transferred. The allowance for men to use contraception with female slaves assisted in thwarting unwanted pregnancies."
  • material which was cited in the source:"Evidence from legal and literary sources indicates that slaves intended primarily for sexual service were singled out from those intended primarily for domestic service (khidma) at slave markets. The first group was referred to as slaves for pleasure (muṭʿa, ladhdha or another word for pleasure) or, bluntly, “slave-girls for sexual intercourse” ( jawārī al-waṭʾ). Some of these slaves became their masters’ concubines and gave birth to their children, but others were probably used sexually for a period of time before being transferred to fulltime domestic service, which was facilitated by the permission to use contraceptive methods with slave women."Saff V. (talk) 18:16, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
The source is a journal article that is behind a paywall, and I don't have access. But Googling the text shows that you are correct; it is copied/too closely paraphrased. — Diannaa (talk) 21:18, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

I did not copy the text directly but paraphrased. If you take a look at what was used it is not word for word the same and is also only a very minor portion of the overall statements the party has made on this issue on the related page. Direct quotes were clearly indicated with quotation marks. All the information was also clearly cited with the source it was in reference to. Helper201 (talk) 20:40, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

What I removed:

and that universal access to public health care is one of their proudest achievements. It argues that too many health care services Canadian's need, like access to prescription medications, fall outside Medicare, meaning families have to pick up large out-of-pocket costs. ... This includes a roadmap to placing dental care in the Canada Health Act, reasoning that ... It also includes mental health care being available at no cost for those who need it, everyone being able to access regular eye and hearing care, as well as infertility procedures.

Source website:

Universal access to public health care is one of the proudest achievements of New Democrats. But today, too many of the health care services we need – like access to prescription medications – fall outside Medicare, leaving families to face huge out-of-pocket costs. ... develop a roadmap to including dental care in the Canada Health Act. Mental health care should be available at no cost for people who need it, and everyone should be able to get regular eye care and hearing care. Canadians struggling with infertility should also have access to the procedures and care they need, no matter which province or territory they live in.

Overlapping text is highlighted with Bold. That's not adequately paraphrased, because it presents the same ideas in the same order using similar/identical wording.— Diannaa (talk) 21:12, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Katelin_Schutz

Diannaa, wonderful to be collaborating with you on Draft:Katelin_Schutz! I've read all the copyright guidance and was under the impression that as a Draft article it was okay to be in an in-progress state of summarizing copyright material -- are you saying that even in a draft, large quotes are not okay? I was in the middle of summarizing the citations in the Research section. It looks like many of the previous edits are now unaccessible. Did you intend to make them inaccessible? Your changes deleted seven of the fourteen citations, which are tedious to create. Could you please undelete those or must you force me to re-gather that information? StarTravelerUSA (talk) 22:42, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The material I removed was not quotations but rather copy-pastes of article abstracts and the like. We can't host copyright material anywhere on Wikipedia, not even in sandboxes or drafts. I can send you a copy of the removed material via email if you like (I would send a copy of the draft as it stood at 12:55, January 13, 2021‎ UTC). But none of what I removed can be kept as part of the finished draft.— Diannaa (talk) 22:56, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, please send it to me by email. What tool helps you send me an email, or do you want me to post my email address here?
I understand copyright very well; passionate about it, actually. Sadly, I had mistakenly thought that Drafts were a safe zone, and I understand why they are not. Terribly sorry. I'll do my drafting in Google Docs and then transition to MediaWiki after summarizing. Best regards! StarTravelerUSA (talk) 23:06, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
For content that is already on Wikipedia, we use Earwig's tool. You might try https://copyleaks.com/text-compare but use it judiciously, as you only get a small number of free looks per day.— Diannaa (talk) 23:13, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Does the Earwig's tool send emails? I don't see a button for that. I responded to the email you sent asking for the version from 12:55, 13 January 2021‎ which has the now-missing seven additional citations. Hopefully that's easy for you to resurrect for me. Thanks! StarTravelerUSA (talk) 14:04, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
I sent the email yesterday. Try your spam folder. Get back to me if it's not there.— Diannaa (talk) 14:06, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Diannaa I noticed you cut off some of this article I made due to copyright. I completely understand obviously I did not mean any breach of copyright with my editing and I did put the text from the site in my own words and I hoped this would avoid such a thing. I will take into account your feedback on future edits thanks for your input into regulating the article! Anonymous contributor 1707 (talk) 10:48, 15 January 2021 (UTC).

Diannaa, I've made the pages requested and now awaiting response as to what further I can do to resolve my mistake. Thank you for your time. TimHitchings (talk) 16:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I've pasted the new version into the draft, it looks okay.— Diannaa (talk) 19:43, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
YOU ARE AWESOME!!! Thank you. TimHitchings (talk) 21:02, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Master (2021 film)

I removed the plot section of the above film because I believed it to be copyright infringement. I also deleted various entries in the history per R1. The possibility of the website copying from Wikipedia occurred to me, but for various reasons I felt it unlikely. The user who added the material has put it back and claims that the material is theirs and that the website copied it and that the website does this routinely. For their defense you can look at either my Talk page or the Talk page of the film. I checked to see if there are previous versions of the webpage in the Wayback machine, but, assuming I did it properly (I hardly ever do this, so I'm not confident in my skills), there is no archived version. I was hoping you had some magical wand (smile) up your expert sleeve to determine who did what to whom. If you decide that the user is right, feel free to reverse my revdels as well, or if you prefer I do it, let me know. Thanks for your time.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:46, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I would have to say it's possible that our user wrote the plot section. Checking Kaabil I see multiple Wikipedians contributed to write the plot section back in 2017 yet the website has an identical plot section to what we have today. Content here matches Gangster (film series).— Diannaa (talk) 19:53, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Despite my suspicions generally about the user, the plot syntax has an unusual ungrammatical quirk: the user starts phrases with capital letters. After removing the section, I noticed that the user does the same thing on my Talk page (and elsewhere). All things now considered, better to AGF, at least in this instance. Thanks for your input.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:43, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
Lots of people from India have that quirk, so it isn't necessarily a tell— Diannaa (talk) 20:49, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, January 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 00:06, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

University of Florida College of Design, Construction and Planning

Are you psychic? I didn't even run a copyvio check on that page... nice catch. How did you figure it out? Onel5969 TT me 00:08, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

It was listed at CopyPatrol.— Diannaa (talk) 00:22, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Wow. I didn't even know about that. Thanks.Onel5969 TT me 04:42, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Please stop

You do have good intentions—I understand... But you're edits are a mistake. The reason why its copied is that all communist organizations are identical on the main organs. That is. Every Communist Party has the congress as its leading institution, followed by the Central Committee and then the Politburo. There are of course exceptions to this rule, but they are usually short-lasing (for instance, Laos didn't have a Secretariat from 1996 to 2001). --Ruling party (talk) 16:54, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Ruling party: I object to copying unsourced material from one article to another; that's why I removed it. Also note, when copying from one Wikipedia page to another, you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 17:08, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
1 WP is in PD. I can copy things from one article to another if its relevant.
2 If you read the article you would see it is referenced (most of it). I've been intensely on this for the last couple of days.
3 This is WP. I don't write in the page; this sentenced was written by user Diana on 14 February 2016.
  • 4 A lead is not supposed to referencede—that is in fact a bad. Everything in a lead is supposed to be mentioned and referenced in the body. That is a basic writing principle. --Ruling party (talk) 17:12, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not public domain. It is released under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. The "attribution" portion of the license means that when copying within Wikipedia, you must provide attribution to the original contributor(s). This is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content, disclosing the copying and linking to the copied page, e.g., copied content from [[page name]]; see that page's history for attribution. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying within Wikipedia in the future. Attribution is also required when copying public domain text; this can be done by including the template {{PD-notice}} at the end of your citation.— Diannaa (talk) 17:19, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

I want take advice from you

Please help me I am new.... POTIMANCH (talk) 17:50, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Please give me some time for discussion this matter.thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by POTIMANCH (talk • contribs) 18:01, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

DIANNAA i just edit this in draft not in public.. Give me some time to review every thing..please help..if i do any mistake please warn me — Preceding unsigned comment added by POTIMANCH (talk • contribs) 18:43, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry but copyright content is not allowed anywhere on Wikipedia, not even in sandboxes or drafts.— Diannaa (talk) 19:37, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Anarchism in Uganda

This edit caused the article to show up in the NPP queue as a previously deleted article (actually it was redirected by a site-banned user). I checked the user who recently removed redirect, and saw your 3 CSD also about anarchism on their UTP. You might want to take a look at the article I just reviewed, and please advise if you see a problem. Atsme 💬 📧 20:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

I don't see any violations, Atsme.— Diannaa (talk) 21:07, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey, I saw that you edit copyright violations so wanted to ask your opinion about this: [3]. I personally believe it is a copyright violation, but the person that added it do not, your opinion would be valuable. --Supreme Deliciousness (talk) 06:29, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. What do you think of this? These quotes at Tell Abyad are way longer than the removed copyright infringement at Syrian KurdistanParadise Chronicle (talk) 22:39, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Short properly attributed quotations are allowed — Diannaa (talk) 22:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Talk: Smart Contract

Thanks for your comment and edit on my addition to the Smart Contract article. I have had a read of the links that you provided, and understand now that the issues with the deleted part were that the in-line citation should have been made clearer and more paraphrasing should be done (previously I used quotation marks instead, but appreciate that the lifted content was pretty chunky). Before I make another go at editing the article, may I please check whether the following revised version is acceptable? Please let me know if this kind of questions is not acceptable (with apologies), and I should have just made the edit for further review instead.

One description put forward by Blycha and Garside is "a legally binding, digital agreement in which part or all of the agreement is intended to execute as algorithmic instructions". [cite: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3743932; https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3748266] The Blycha and Garside model sets out five key components of a smart legal contract: (1) legally binding status; (2) being in a form that is machine readable or digital; (3) having contents that are a mix of natural language and machine-readable or algorithmic instructions that are run digitally (such as computer code); (4) having active functions triggered or affected by data or events generated from external or internal data sources; and (5) executed digitally. [cite: as above]

Many thanks in advance. MV at Digital Law Group HSF (talk) 09:40, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

That version doesn't work, because it presents the same ideas in the same order using identical language. The only difference is your proposed addition is shorter.— Diannaa (talk) 13:36, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

User:Hedgeswayd

Hi, I noticed you indef blocked this user for their disruptive behavior. It seems they're editing using an IP doing the same thing: 2001:4455:6F7:AB00:68C4:C1EE:417D:F0DF (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Hope it's okay I went to you directly via your talk page instead of using a more "official" venue. Thanks. Drovethrughosts (talk) 23:04, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

I was just looking at that too, and blocked the range 2001:4455:6F7:AB00:0:0:0:0/64 for one month. There's as you probably know a sockpuppet case at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Truckeckhart2009/Archive and there's a list of what I know so far at User:Diannaa/sandbox. — Diannaa (talk) 23:11, 18 January 2021 (UTC) Moved to User:Diannaa/Truckeckhart2009— Diannaa (talk) 22:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Requesting Review Carrollton High School (Carrollton, Georgia)

Hello Dianna, I am requesting your review of my edits to the aforementioned page to ensure it is up to Wikipedia standards in terms of references and copyright. If they are, I motion to remove the "additional references needed" tag. However, if it is not up to standards, please let me know, and I will continue to work on improving the quality of the article. Thank you very much! I appreciate your help!

EmperorKen (talk) 06:34, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

The addition looks okay from a copyright point of view, but there's still a need for additional citations. — Diannaa (talk) 11:38, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
User:Diannaa Thank you for your input! I will continue to look for more citations. - EmperorKen (talk) 15:06, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. Would you mind taking a look at Talk:Maurice Novoa#Sources and notability to check whether I gave another editor some incorrect information about convenience links being used for citations? -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:07, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry I don't know anything about the topic, and don't have time to study it right now.— Diannaa (talk) 15:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
No problem. My request was a bit vague anyway. I'm just trying to figure out whether WP:ELNEVER would apply to scans of entire newspaper articles, etc. posted on an individual's personal website or an organization's website when neither is the original copyright holder of the content in question. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:56, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the more concise question. Yes, ELNEVER would apply to any instance where the person or organization is not the copyright holder, unless there's evidence that the copyright holder has given permission. A newspaper article could still be cited though, without offering a link— Diannaa (talk) 23:34, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
I thought that was the case, but wasn't sure. Thanks for clarifying. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:50, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Southern Poverty Law Center

Hello, my apologies for the mistake. Are you referring to the line of text I accidentally added after I quoted Ayaan Hirsi Ali from her New York Times editorial? I copy and pasted some of the text from the article to quote her criticism directly, as another editor said my previous edit contained no explicit criticism. I did not mean to add the unquoted portion of text. I went back and removed it, as I understood it could not stay there due to copyright issues. I guess it was still an issue as it exists in the edit history. What would be the solution for something like that in the future? That I contact you immediately so you can wipe it? Best, Thriley (talk) 18:31, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

There were no quotation marks or attribution for the final paragraph of your addition. You did later remove it though - thanks for doing that. If a similar thing happens in the future, you could post here and request revision deletion, or post at WP:AN, or use the template {{Copyvio-revdel}} to call attention to the problem. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 23:30, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Granger & Gregory 1923

Howdy! It's been a while. Given the fact that you work on copyright-related issues, I would like some help on this one. I'm currently working on a giant expansion for Protoceratops and noticed that the describing paper of P. andrewsi has some photographs of the holotype. I'm not sure of its copyright status though, and it would be nice to include these in the Discovery/History section. PaleoNeolitic (talk) 21:27, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi there, hope you are well. Material (both text and images) published in the US prior to 1926 is in the public domain, because the copyright has expired. Images can be uploaded to the Commons with the copyright tag {{PD-US-expired}} and if you choose to copy any of the text, include the {{PD-notice}} template as part of your citation. — Diannaa (talk) 21:38, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
Good to know 👌. Thank you so much! PaleoNeolitic (talk) 21:48, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Indian Forest Service

Hi Diannaa. I have Indian Forest Service on my watch list. Along with being excessively detailed, Earwig's CV tool identifies this as a potential source. I've not had time to investigate further. Could you take a look? Thanks! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:07, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Cleaned. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 13:35, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
I won't be doing revision deletion as the edits go back 5 years or more. Please keep an eye on it! — Diannaa (talk) 13:56, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Attribution question

Hi! Kind regards, I just had a question regarding attribution: If an article or a list copies content from several others, should the attribution be included in several edit summaries (given that not all articles can be named in a single summary)? or is it enough to include a limited number of them? Many thanks in advance! --NoonIcarus (talk) 14:48, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

In order to properly credit all the authors, each and every page needs to be listed in the edit summary. If you don't have enough room in the edit summary field, make smaller edits to allow for additional edit summaries. People shouldn't make overwhelmingly huge edits regardless, as they are more difficult for patrollers and watchers to assess.— Diannaa (talk) 14:54, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Superb, many thanks! --NoonIcarus (talk) 16:29, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, need help.

Hello, need help.

I am currently dealing with a WP:DE situation. This new Wikipedia user entered a page in which he has a conflict of interest and modified it with one-sided nationalist propaganda, deleted sourced information (or replaced them with ones crediting his own people) and when I try to counter him (I tried to cooperate with him using the kindest language in my talk page, but he insisted on not cooperating and saying I will be punished and he is warning me.) I kindly request someone reads our conversations (1, 2, 3) and does what is necessary. ~𝓐𝓭𝓲𝓰𝓪𝓫𝓻𝓮𝓴 𝓽𝓱𝓮 𝓕𝓲𝓻𝓼𝓽~Contact Circassia 15:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't have time to help with this. It looks like it's a content dispute and edit war. The place to start is to discuss the matter at the article talk page (not in edit summaries). If that doesn't work, please see WP:DR for dispute resolution possibilities. — Diannaa (talk) 20:26, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Second opinion re RD1

I just completed an RD1, in connection with the poem used at an inauguration. article edit The text can be found at this site. Given the high profile of the subject matter, I wanted to get a second set of eyes to make sure my RD1 was warranted.S Philbrick(Talk) 18:40, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

My opinion is that much of the material on the LoC website is in the public domain, but this particular poem is not. The source article is a LoC blog, and the poem's appearance in that blog does not make it PD.— Diannaa (talk) 20:22, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Diannaa, Thanks. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:17, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Request for help at Mohamed Aboutrika

I've seen you around the Wiki on copyvio patrol, so I wonder if you can help me out at Mohamed Aboutrika. I found a copied paragraph from a FIFA article and removed it, and I was going to request revdel, but:

A) I can't find the first diff; it must have been years ago and the edit history is huge (I can't use the handy tool for finding additions at the moment).

B) Since it was so long ago and there have been so many edits since, I don't even know if a revdel is appropriate?

Thanks for any help you can give me. Wikignome Wintergreentalk 21:44, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

The copyvio was added way back in 2012 so I don't think rev-del is appropriate. You might like to try the slick new app : mw:Who Wrote That? It's much quicker and easier to use than WikiBlame. — Diannaa (talk) 23:25, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay, thank you! Wikignome Wintergreentalk 23:37, 22 January 2021 (UTC)

Can I ask for your help again at Rowther?

An IP added a huge copyvio to Rowther a few months ago, which I removed yesterday and marked for revdel, but today another IP came along and reverted to the bad version. Could you swing by the page and handle the request before the IP comes back? Wikignome Wintergreentalk 15:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Help? Now it's turned into an edit war with another user! Wikignome Wintergreentalk 17:46, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. This was turning into a sort of stressful morning. Wikignome Wintergreentalk 18:04, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay in replying. Unfortunately the user is auto-comfirmed so page protection won't help. We will have to watch.— Diannaa (talk) 18:05, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Cooper Rollow

I don't know if I'm posting this in the correct place--this website is so confusing. At any rate, thank you for adding some updates to the Cooper Rollow post. However, you left out many of his awards and the fact he authored 3 books. I am a family member. My domestic partner is his granddaughter and we were hoping to preserve his legacy. As you can see, most of the information I added came from the Chicago Tribune article. We could reword it to add in the relevant facts but since it linked to the article it did not seem to violate copywrite. The information from the article came from my Domestic Partner's uncle. If I need to get permission from the Tribune to add the additional exact quotes I'm not sure how to do that, but I could contact them. The information is the same. So, if we can add those awards and book authorships in a reworded format that could work. I am not a computer coder but this website seems to be in HTML or basic format. For more users to add updates, should it not be in a Word format, etc. Apologies for not understanding as this is very difficult to navigate.

BaxterDC (talk) 22:09, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello BaxterDC. The Chicago Tribune is definitely copyright - in fact the obituary from which you copied the prose is marked at the bottom as "Copyright © 2021, Chicago Tribune". It's okay for you to list awards, books, or whatever sourced content you think is appropriate as long as you do so in your own words. But it's not okay to copy from other websites. The vast majority of them enjoy copyright protection and cannot be copied here unaltered. Regarding Wikipedia's interface, there's been much research and discussion on that over the years, and a better solution has yet to be found. You might try the visual editor as an alternative to wiki markup. — Diannaa (talk) 13:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

question

Hey Dianna, hope you are well and staying safe. I have a question. I have written paragraphs on a couple of subjects that have multiple articles where those same paragraphs are pertinent and applicable to both articles. Can I put the same paragraphs in both places? It isn't copying if I wrote them is it? Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:59, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

It's okay to copy text from one Wikipedia article to another, even if you didn't write it, as long as you provide attribution. Please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia for instructions. If you are the sole author, attribution is not required, but it's a good idea to do it anyway so patrollers know where you got the material.— Diannaa (talk) 11:37, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:03, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

question re: Waterlogging (agriculture)

I got the below message, when i tried to edit one of the article available on wikipedia. But the thing is I have copied the article from my own website and I am willing to share it here as it gives more information which is not available here. Please guide me if i am doing it wrong. Your help would make my day.Vicky1830 (talk) 13:07, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; however, please remember the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Waterlogging (agriculture), may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless used with permission. It is almost never okay to copy extensive text out of a book or website and paste it into a Wikipedia article with little or no alteration, though you can clearly and briefly quote copyrighted text in the right circumstances. Content that does not comply with this legal rule must be removed.

As you said,'Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Waterlogging (agriculture), may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless used with permission. I am the original author of that copied article and i am willing to share it here. Vicky1830 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 13:28, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have 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) 15:18, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio Corporal Jackie

Hi Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of potential copyright content in the Corporal Jackie article. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 20:43, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

It's too complex for me to deal with right now. I am listing at WP:CP— Diannaa (talk) 21:06, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

GNU Free Documentation License

Hello Diannaa, you recently removed content that was taken from openSUSE wiki and claim this was a copyright violation. openSUSE wiki publishes under GNU Free Documentation license, and as source was properly cited, I see no point in removing it. --Coogor (talk) 14:27, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

GNU license alone is not a compatible license. See WP:Compatible license.— Diannaa (talk) 15:10, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Old Petra Museum

Hello Diannaa - About the speedy deletion, please notice: This article is translated directly from Wikipedia Arabic and it is not a copywrite as I have translated it myself. It is impossible that you can find a sentence in the article identical to https://mat7f.blogspot.com/2016/05/this-is-detailed-report-on-most.html. I demand that you remove the deletion tag. I would appreciate if you could advise me how to improve this article. Thanks for your concern. - MA Javadi (talk) 15:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I see by checking the old revisions at the Arabic Wikipedia that they had the content first, and the blog post was copied from there. In the future, when copying from one Wikipedia to another (or from one Wikipedia article to another), please say so in your edit summary like I did here. You can also place a {{translated}} template on the article's talk page. That way you can help me avoid mistakes such as this. Also, providing attribution is required under the terms of our license, so you have to do it. Sorry for the mistake.— Diannaa (talk) 20:32, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you very much and I am very happy to get to know you. - MA Javadi (talk) 12:37, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Edits to Golrokh Ebrahimi Iraee

Hello, Diannaa
Several edits by me to the Golrokh Ebrahimi Iraee page have been removed (as I forgot to rephrase the content) without warning. Is there any way to retrieve said edits (so that I can amend them), or are they definitely lost? Are the references lost?
I have little time and motivation to try and find them again from external sources.

Thank you — Bernarddb (talk) 17:09, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

I see by my edit summary ahtat the source was this page.— Diannaa (talk) 20:23, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Doubts

Is data from IMD copyrighted?And why my edits were reverted? SovietCyclone (talk) 15:19, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

In India, government works are copyright for 60 years from publication date.— Diannaa (talk) 15:34, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, we have a user here who's uploading non-free files, which is OK in itself, but he's adding "Non-free with permission" tags, which are not OK unless he actually has permission, which he obviously doesn't. Elizium23 (talk) 01:54, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Could you maybe explain to them why they should not do that? You don't have to be an admin to explain stuff to the new editors— Diannaa (talk) 02:10, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Diannaa, I will certainly try. I am not sure whether the editor speaks any English. Since they do not use edit summaries and have left exactly 1 (one) talk page comment in hundreds of edits since creation on October 22, I dread that this is yet another Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joloimpat case, although he's apparently been absolved of sock puppetry. Elizium23 (talk) 02:16, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Grace be with you— Diannaa (talk) 02:19, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I saw that you deleted the material recently added by Alleged editor to Abstract and concrete‎. Are you sure that this material constituted a copyright violation? I was skeptical myself at first as well because of edit summary "added content from SEP". But I checked a few of the added passages and they were either properly paraphrased or explicitly quoted. I didn't check thoroughly though, so maybe you saw something that I missed. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:33, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

I checked it using Earwig's tool and it showed a large overlap, circa 87%. It's true that some of it was quotations (large quotations), but much of it was not. Using lots of quotations is not a good idea (though not a copyright violation) as it's a violation of our non-free content guideline. Sorry I don't have the time to pick apart the edit to locate any useful additions, so I removed it in its entirety. — Diannaa (talk) 14:41, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Looking at another edit by Alleged editor to Property (philosophy), I'm having doubts about what I just said. The material is copied from [4] and seems to constitute another copyright violation. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:44, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
I will check this out right away. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
And unfortunately more here copied from [5]. It's often not direct copy-paste but a word or two are changed, making it more difficult to spot. Phlsph7 (talk) 15:10, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
And here copied from here. Phlsph7 (talk) 15:17, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
I'm not seeing much in that one.— Diannaa (talk) 15:23, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
wiki: "Potter was born in northeast South Dakota, on the edge of the Coteau de Prairie."
pdf: "Dr. Potter was born on August 27, 1911, in northeast South Dakota, on the edge of the Coteau de Prairie."
But not sure, maybe this is more of a standard phrase. Phlsph7 (talk) 15:32, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
You might not have noticed that I already took that out.— Diannaa (talk) 15:35, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
Ah alright, thx. Phlsph7 (talk) 15:40, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
And here copied from here. Phlsph7 (talk) 15:25, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

User: Wiki.12022017

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Variant_of_Concern_202012/01#Please_consider_restoration_of_disambiguation_of_biological_and_epidemiological_transmission_-_sourced_from_blog_post — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki.12022017 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:10, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

I think it is good that experienced people like you can answer users who have many questions.

Hi. I write to you with great respect. I have no intention of fighting or winning a fight. I just want you to answer questions about the article about Elon Musk. Why are very few users able to edit this article? Why are edits reverted to many users and a few users can edit without their edits being reversed? HAL333 Why can this user remove content without having to explain anything on the talk page? Many well-intentioned users are unable to edit this article because this user reverts most users' edits. The user can modify the article at will and other users must always use the talk page. Why does this user have privileges over the other Wikipedia users?. The user has removed a lot of content from the main article without having to use the talk page. I just want you to answer me. I think it is good that experienced people like you can answer users who have many questions. All my esteem and appreciation towards you. --JShark (talk) 03:29, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

There is a conflict of interest in this article. [6] Apparently I am not the only one who has noticed the same about this user QRep2020. The users Elephanthunter and BoMadsen88 are absolutely right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#QRep2020 --JShark (talk) 05:17, 1 February 2021 (UTC)
Clearly the integrity of this article is not good. It would be good if many users talk about this topic and so there would be no doubts about the integrity of this article in the future. --JShark (talk) 05:27, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Draft:T2 Systems

Hi Diana, I appreciate the fact that you are focused on taking out articles for copyright infringement. But T2 Systems was still in draft and had not been submitted for publishing on Wikipedia's main page. I was still working on the article. I just started with it. I wasn't expecting anyone to look that way until it is submitted. Please I would like to continue with it. I know there were a few copy and paste but that was just for the sake of the information on crunchbase. I was going to change every single wording there. Thanks for understanding. TJO28 (talk) 14:25, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Please don't add copyright content to Wikipedia, not even temporarily for editing. Please do your amendments before you save the page, or use an external editor. Regardless of the copyright issue, the company is likely not notable enough for inclusion in the encyclopedia at this time. Please see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 14:31, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diana sorry for having to make you erase my content again it is just wasting your time on my part. I tried adding links instead to my articles to make them valid but then then got critised on notability due to notability issues.I still do not believe on breaching copyright but again I have a very basic understanding of it. From what you said I now have a clear understanding that I cannot copy anything from the Internet onto Wikipedia sorry if this seems obvious. I thought as the website was not copyrighted the content was useable.I know this seems like ripping people off but I not sure how far I can change something especially when it is very specific like in having parts. I just wanted to contribute I guess my ambition blinded— me a bit. From now on I will only write with my knowledge and not others. I will make sure all my articles will be the same. I appreciate you have to protect Wikipedia its fine I am only editing to improve so I care. You are doing a very good job trying to patrol Wikipedia for copyright violations keep it up I do believe it is an important job as Wikipedia going as without you and people like you copyright breaches would make Wikipedia very difficult to keep running with all the lawsuits.I know that sounds very hypocritical but I did not intend to breach copyright as naive as that may seem. So Diana keep up the good work apologise for the breach in future I will copy nothing from websites onto Wikipedia and if I do which I won`t I will completely understand you banning me I will learn from this to become a better editor with highest regards Anonymous contributor 1707 (talk) 22:55, 1 February 2021 (UTC).

Hi Anonymous contributor 1707. Here's some useful/basic information regarding our copyright expectations written in plain English. 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 Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students.
Regarding what to include when adding to articles, what we do is use our sources as a source of information, and then write fresh prose using our own words. Don't write from your own knowledge; summarise what other people have written in reliable sources. Cite your sources. Wikipedia is hard to learn, so sorry, but I hope you stay and enjoy helping — Diannaa (talk) 23:18, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. I see that last month you warned Tim96144 about copying from websites without attribution. I first brought this to their attention in November 2020 (User talk:Tim96144#All You Need to Know), where they said they would "try to adapt material into [my] own words". A couple of days went by, and they had created another article where they copied without attribution from a website. I received no response. To your warning last month, they gave no response either. User:Richard3120 has just left them another warning about copyright infringement (User talk:Tim96144#Articles for Illenium and other songs). In a past discussion, Tim96144 revealed that they are Taiwanese, so I assume there's a language barrier where they are not especially fluent in English and this copying may be in part because they can't write or adapt material into English as best as they would like, but I am not sure this is going to stop whatever the circumstance. Besides, these three sections are just the incidents we know about. I see Tim96144 creating articles quite often, and I'm sure there's more you, I, or Richard3120 have missed. I'm not sure how you'd like to proceed but this is still going on after 3(+) warnings. Ss112 14:57, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

I'll just add that almost every creation I have seen from Tim96144 has included copyright violations, with straight up copy-and-paste from other articles – I have removed or altered them in every case to avoid the copyvio, but it does get tiring having to police their articles. Richard3120 (talk) 15:00, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
I've given them a final warning in plain English. If this doesn't stop the problem please let me know immediately. Thanks.— Diannaa (talk) 15:03, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
Tim96144 has deleted both my post and your warning from their talk page [7] – I'm pretty certain they understand exactly what we are talking about and I'm equally certain that they have chosen to ignore the warnings. We'll see what happens with their future edits. Richard3120 (talk) 01:36, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
OK, if you think those articles that I created were violated copyright, I will reduce creating new articles and continue update Billboard charts or add those incomplete charts in the future, return to my original promise is the best. Tim96144 (talk) 01:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Matrubhaban School & College, Cuttack

Hello, I am writing this regarding Matrubhaban School & college, Cuttack page. Respectfully, I apologizing for the copyright infringement. I won't let it happen again, Can you please tell me is there any other copyright infringement are there in this article. One more request is below-given link would be enough for reference for matrubhaban school & college, Cuttack.Rewrite Man (talk) 15:58, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

http://rtiodisha.in/pa/T1RILzEwLzIxODQ4Lzc=

The main reason the article was deleted is because the subject does not meet our notability requirements. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matrubhaban School & College, Cuttack for more information. The version I deleted also contained violations of our copyright policy.— Diannaa (talk) 21:26, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Shields Green

I'd appreciate if you would lay off corrections to the Shields Green article for at least two weeks. I have the new (only) book on him in front of me right now. It's my style of working, usually, not to make revisions in my sandbox and then replace the whole sections with the corrections. Making revisions as they cone up seems to work best, at least most of the time.

I appreciate your spelling corrections, spelling nistakes are embarrassing. But with the sentence "According to Douglass, who would have known, Green was a fugitive slave", you took out "who would have known". I think that's important because there is conflicting information and Douglass is the most reliable source and this needs to be said. I didn't discuss in that sentence _why_ he would have known, I thought that was obvious (Green lived in his house for over a year), but since it isn't, I'll add a clause on it. deisenbe (talk) 18:18, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Ichika Kasuga

Can you help me to upload the theatrical poster of Sword Art Online Progressive: Aria Of A Starless Night ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ichika Kasuga (talk • contribs) 06:42, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

If you can provide a link— Diannaa (talk) 12:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
This is the link "http://operationrainfall.com/2020/11/08/sword-art-online-progressive-aria-of-a-starless-night-film-premieres-2021/".

Please upload the page as soon as possible. Ichika Kasuga 16:51, 6 February 2021 (UTC)Ichika Kasuga 4:46, 6 February 2021 UTC

Sorry but there's no film poster at that site. How about this?— Diannaa (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, this one is better. Thank you for your help. Ichika Kasuga 17:29, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dianna - sorry for the unintentional copyvios on Ida E. Lewis! I thought I'd rephrased/summarized sufficiently. In looking at the current version, it doesn't seem to look any different from what I wrote, so I'm puzzled as to what exactly got changed. I went to the History tab for the article to try to figure out what content was considered copyvio, but I'm unable to access any of the earlier versions to compare them (the dates are shown with strikeout and are not selectable). Do you happen to know why that might be? Thanks! Bookgrrl holler/lookee here 15:46, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found.
The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. Mostly I re-wrote the material rather than completely removing.— Diannaa (talk) 20:43, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I already avoided violation

Hey there, saw your message. About the CR violation on Thriprayar Ramachandran, I hope I already solved the problem as per the suggestion by another user. Please tell me what should I do next as this is the first time among the 31 articles that I am created which I had this problem. Thankyou Kichu🐘 Discuss 14:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I do realize that the page had already been cleaned, and posted the note for your information only. There's no remaining violations on this particular article. Sorry for the misunderstanding.— Diannaa (talk) 14:31, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Emery Battis

Hi. Thank you for your help yesterday. I've rewritten it several times but quoted stage reviews and it got flagged again by Eranbot. I requested deletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Emery_Battis&action=edit&redlink=1

It's now in my sandbox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HistoricalAccountings/sandbox

I have gone through the text again removing all but two pertinent quotes but I think his list of accomplishments and academic credits might still flag. Can it be checked again before posting so it's not flagged again?

Thank you so much.

--HistoricalAccountings (talk) 16:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

I Already looked at the bot report and I agree that it's the quotations that's setting it off. The version in your sandbox still shows a 29.6% overlap with the Washington Post obit using Earwig's tool. Almost all of the overlap is as a result of the use of quotations. I don't know what amount of copying triggers a CopyPatrol bot report. Using quotations is not a violation of our copyright policy. But it's best to use a minimum or quotations and write your own prose using your sources as a source of information (not quotes) as it makes for a more engaging, interesting article. Wiki is hard, so sorry.— Diannaa (talk) 16:28, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for checking it. Do you think I should post with quotes (what would happen?) or remove them entirely (or some of them) for now? --HistoricalAccountings (talk) 16:40, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
I think the version in your sandbox is now okay to move back to mainspace. I will go ahead and do that now.— Diannaa (talk) 17:09, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio Rodney, Mississippi

Hello Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of potential copyright content in the Rodney, Mississippi article, dating back to July 2008. I could not determine if it is a mirror site of the Wikipedia article. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 16:41, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

The Wayback Machine confirms it was copied from that website; too bad, I gotta remove most of the content. Thank you for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 17:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Diannaa. Since you already have a goat, I'll offer you coffee and dessert for all your hard work. Woodlot (talk) 17:46, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
mmmm, coffee and desserts— Diannaa (talk) 17:48, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Thank you so much for all your help!

HistoricalAccountings (talk) 17:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks!— Diannaa (talk) 17:17, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Help.

Hello. Today I created This article: Michael Johnson (American politician) but I do not know why the history of this article is wrong. The history starts from 11 December 2015‎. Why?پخش مطلب (talk) 18:10, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much Diannaa ...پخش مطلب (talk) 20:20, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio deletion

Hi Diannaa, does this reverted copyvio need to be deleted from the history? Thanks. BilCat (talk) 19:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

 Done— Diannaa (talk) 20:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
So tired, time for cooki— Diannaa (talk) 20:08, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) It's always time for cooki. I learned that from the expert long ago. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:34, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
As requested! BilCat (talk) 21:56, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

Sherlie Matthews

Copied from http://www.sherliematthews.com/bio.html? 86.183.242.125 (talk) 09:08, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Someone has removed the worst of it— Diannaa (talk) 10:10, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Despite you previously deleting problematic revisions twice at Luke Jerram (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) there have been two further attempts to add the same copyrighted text at this article. Thank you. FDW777 (talk) 10:52, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hanfu

Hi Diannaa,

Thank you for the notice, I will paraphrase the sentences more at Hanfu.

Best,

Aklys Erida Aklys Erida (talk) 15:27, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
Thanks for resolving the Sword Art Online plot copyright issue. I really appreciate it. Catalyzzt (talk) 16:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Adopt a user

Diannaa, I'm trying to guide a user that you blocked several days ago. Is it ok to use and answer your question as a start point to learn about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 17:34, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

  • @Jeromi Mikhael: He's been banned after seven warnings for copyvio. Also, it is evident that he is not here for Wikipedia's purpose. By the way, see my recent message on his talkpage. Wretchskull (talk) 18:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Jeromi Mikhael, please don't answer the questions - the user has to do that themselves. If they are unable to do so, they can't resume editing. I don't think English is their first language, which is a barrier to contributing, and a barrier to reading and comprehending our complex policies and other rules. Wretchskull, there is a difference between "blocked" and "banned". The user is blocked, not banned.— Diannaa (talk) 22:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
      • Uh, that's weird for you to bring up I don't think English is their first language and saying that would become a barrier to reading and comprehending our complex policies and other rules. Guess who else doesn't have English as their first language. Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 00:11, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa

Thanks for your helpful note. Sorry regarding the copyright issue. We have a bit of a problem on that page, as if things don't follow the source exactly, two editors will remove it claiming it doesn't represent the source.

They are just very gatekeepery and want to stop any changes to the article, its very frustrating. I will try to avoid tripping over copyright rules again though. Any further advice you might have will be greatly appreciated as I'm quite new to all this.

For example can we use a picture of person under fair use?

PlainAndSimpleTailor (talk) 21:07, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't matter how frustrated you get - please don't add copyright text to Wikipedia. It's not allowed. Regarding photos, we only allow fair use photos of people who are dead. Please see Wikipedia:Non-free content for the full set of rules regarding the topic of fair use. — Diannaa (talk) 22:15, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello so too editors are removing text using that source because it's paraphrasing about minimum alcohol pricing based of the source rather than repeating it verbatim. It seems to be stuck between a rock and hard place? PlainAndSimpleTailor (talk) 13:53, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have time to get involved in that aspect.— Diannaa (talk) 14:31, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

ANI thread mentioning you

See WP:ANI#Editor adding lots of copyvios DuncanHill (talk) 18:04, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Antonio D. Tillis

Greetings, I would appreciate it if you would replace the original edits I made to the Antonio D. Tillis page on Monday, February 9th. As his assistant and author of his current biography, the materials I submitted to the page were not copyright infringement. As it stands, the current page is not correct, Hispanism is not even a discipline, and all of the updates I made reflect his research and his life. Furthermore, I spent quite a few hours working on formatting and typing materials to reflect the design and information he wanted to share on his page. DrPhd47 (talk) 02:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC)Drphd47

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) 03:04, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you!

I don't have a goat for you like the other person but thank you so much for your kind guidance and assistance on the Minnesota State Capitol Mall page. Myotus (talk) 05:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Brandon Lee's page need to locked from vandalism

Hi Diannaa,

A late happy new year. Brandon Lee's page need to locked from vandalism. The most recurrent thing is a IP address removing the name of his partner.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Brandon_Lee#Removal_of_Eliza_Hutton_from_infobox_as_partner_spam

I have also seen an IP address saying they shot him, way back when.

Most recently homophobic jokes. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Brandon_Lee&diff=next&oldid=992791264

But yeah a lot of users have wasted time reverting vandalism on this page. I think it should be locked from unregistered users.

Thank you.Filmman3000 (talk) 06:17, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Declined – Not enough recent disruptive activity to justify protection. In the future, please use WP:RFPP for requests for page protection.— Diannaa (talk) 12:33, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for referring to the right place but there is a coincidence here. When you declined it an IP address showed up and went insane on Lee's page. The thing that bothers me with it, is not the vandalism, but the creepy factor of it. Combine this with the mental health issues of some of these vandals.
Look you may want to think whatever of me, but it was enough for @Slashme: (who's into math and casually in films), and @VeriteAca: to be a little freaked out by it and bring it to that talk page.
ThanksFilmman3000 (talk) 18:08, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
VeriteAca has not edited since October. — Diannaa (talk) 18:32, 13 February 2021 (UTC)
It doesn't really matter since VeriteAca did edit in a responsible manner during their short stint here. That is all I cared about when I mentioned him or her. I don't want to stretch this conversation too far, and you have been useful to me in improving my contributions here, however, I find that rebuttal weak. I could use the other user mentioned to say the exact opposite, but... Have a good day in the meantime.Filmman3000 (talk) 19:00, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
My point in mentioning it is because it has no bearing on what happens today. Vandalism must be persistent, severe, and currently ongoing for a page to qualify for page protection. This article does not have these characteristics. Please see Wikipedia:Protection policy for full details on the protection policy.— Diannaa (talk) 19:09, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
I wish that would have been your first reply instead of the amount of time someone spent on the site.
Sadly with the demise of Lee and his father, opens the flood gates to a conspiracy theory. This leads people with mental health issues to edit wild stuff. I think a conversation should take place between admins, if such a thread already exists please give me a link and I will add my 2 cents.Filmman3000 (talk) 22:45, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Draft:junaid_bhat

Hey Diannaa hope you are doing good , i'm new here on wikipedia , before somedays i went through a draft Junaid Bhat so i started contributing to this draft i'm not too much experienced on wikipedia so i might had made some mistakes while creating this draft please look after this and i request you help me to get my first work published thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Prakrutiprajapanti (talk • contribs) 08:05, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

You have to submit the draft for review before it can be published. I've added a template to the top of the draft to make it easy for you to do that. Please be patient - there are over 4,000 drafts already in the queue.— Diannaa (talk) 12:39, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
P has asked many editors to help her with her drafts. She has been advised to do her own work. David notMD (talk) 10:57, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Martin Bormann

Hello Diannaa I just wanted to tell you that I am not performing any edit war, but that many people keep removing my information even though I have researched on many reliable sources about Martin Bormann and his life and career. I am simply trying to making it much easier for others to use the page for academic and research purposes by making it easier to know the kind of guy he was. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Captain El Classico (talk • contribs) 13:32, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Please visit the article talk page and comment there, not here, as to why we should include your additions. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 13:37, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio

Hi I made this deletion, does it require a rev-del? Regards CV9933 (talk) 16:44, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Revdel complete. Not to be too picky, but in the future if you could tell me where the content was copied from, as well as let the editor who added it know that they did something wrong, that would be really great. Thanks— Diannaa (talk) 20:37, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks and my apologies if I appeared sloppy, the violation was obvious, but my internet connection was playing up and Earwig's copyvio detector didn't launch for me, so I chose the easiest route. Regards, CV9933 (talk) 09:55, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the info. I don't need a copy of Earwig's report, just a url of where the content was copied from, so I don't have to hunt for it. — Diannaa (talk) 12:24, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Bond Exchange of South Africa

Hi Diannaa. I'm usually very conscious of copyright, and happy to comply of course. But I'm just querying the copy vio here: please explain what material was problematic? Thanks. Fintor (talk) 07:05, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found.— Diannaa (talk) 12:21, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Draft:The Charles Close Society for the Study of Ordnance Survey Maps

Why was this second draft deleted? The first attempt to create this page was deleted for copyright infringement (similar text was used as that on the CCS website). This draft was reinstated without the text but with the infobox restored. So I am not sure why this second draft was deleted. Please would you restore it so that text can be added and the infobox used? Cantiana (talk) 17:13, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

The version I deleted had three paragraphs copied from http://charlesclosesociety.org/society pasted at the bottom of the draft, added by user:Longhead68. I can restore a revision that does not contain the copypaste.— Diannaa (talk) 17:20, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Copyright on the page List of creepypastas

Hi Dianna, I came here because you put me on my discussion page and said that I had put copyrighted content, but I have never copied the text from the sources or put any copyrighted images on the page List of creepypastas. --Germanico5468504 (talk) 19:13, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found.— Diannaa (talk) 20:01, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Francis Xavier‎

Hi, if you have time, could you protect the article? Thanks, (have to sign off for work). Denisarona (talk) 13:25, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected for a period of one week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. — Diannaa (talk) 15:10, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

A pie for you!

Many, many thanks for your help. Denisarona (talk) 15:36, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Valentine Greets!!!

Valentine Greets!!!

Hello Diannaa, love is the language of hearts and is the feeling that joins two souls and brings two hearts together in a bond. Taking love to the level of Wikipedia, spread the WikiLove by wishing each other Happy Valentine's Day, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person.
Sending you a heartfelt and warm love on the eve,
Happy editing,
NASCARfan0548 ↗ 21:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Valentine Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

Thank you for thinking of me today! Cheers,— Diannaa (talk) 23:24, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

User - Tartan357 is illegally changing and tagging Aung San Suu Kyi as Former State Counsellor of Myanmar in Aung San Suu Kyi wiki page

User - Tartan357 is illegally changing and tagging Aung San Suu Kyi as Former State Counsellor of Myanmar in Aung San Suu Kyi wiki page

Could you please kindly assist with this user as this user definitely from Military. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhong ST (talk • contribs) 23:41, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Zhong ST, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for you to spread disinformation. You know as well as I do that Aung San Suu Kyi is no longer in office. You've now reverted past my {{uw-error4}} warning, so I expect you will be blocked soon. ― Tartan357 Talk 00:11, 15 February 2021 (UTC)
Note for Dianna: the the ANI discussion I opened about this editor has been closed by El_C with a partial block of Zhong ST imposed by Oshwah. ― Tartan357 Talk 14:43, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Union Free School District

Hello, Diannaa. You have new messages at Jmabel's talk page.
Message added 14:58, 15 February 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Trouble in paradise

Hi. I know it was a while ago, but do you remember what happened to the League of Copy Editors? I came in during the early days of the GOCE, and we now seem to be having problems of our own; I was wondering if there are any parallels. The relevant bits are later in the thread, and the editor insisting on their rollover words is a fellow guild coordinator. The lead coordinator has been on wikibreak. Stay well and all the best, Miniapolis 15:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Sorry but I've been out of the copy editing biz for quite a while now, and don't remember how rollover was supposed to work. — Diannaa (talk) 15:17, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Help / questions Lyesse Laloui

Hello Diannaa,

Thank you a lot for your comments and contributions, I'm a beginner in the Wikipedia world and trying to comply with the rules as much as I can. If I understood well, I can restore the removed sections if they are paraphrased and cited correctly?

I have a question - I didn't understand why almost all of the external links were removed - the ones that I added and the ones that were added 5 years ago? What is the best practice to choose external links? Should the removed ones be rather qualified as "Further reading" (e. g. the institutions connected with the subject, founded companies)?

I didn't understand why the phrase "Lyesse Laloui's publications indexed by Google Scholar" was also removed, while I saw this practice on several Wikipedia biography profiles, how could I place the link to all the publications without listing them in the article ?

Thank you again

Wkuchars (talk) 15:54, 15 February 2021 (UTC)Wkuchars

External links should be directly related to the subject of the article, not for peripherally related topics. The external links section would be a good place for the Google Scholar link. — Diannaa (talk) 16:06, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Diannaa! Please advice on what has to be changed in order to have the "This article has multiple issues" tag removed? I disclosed the COI on the Lyesse Laloui talk page as well as on my profile. I also referenced many statements. Best, Wkuchars (talk) 12:20, 16 February 2021 (UTC)Wkuchars

The COI tag on your user page needs to remain there permanently. The COI tag can be removed when the promotional/puffery/bias problem is resolved. It's probably too soon for that, since you are editing the article daily. Please check with the person who placed the tag (User:Viewmont Viking) and see what they think. The copyright issue is still not resolved, as your recent addition is partially copied from https://www.epfl.ch/labs/chaire-gaz-naturel/staff/ and https://biogeos.epfl.ch/news/lyesse-laloui-awarded-a-prestigious-erc-proof-of-concept-grant/ — Diannaa (talk) 12:34, 16 February 2021 (UTC)\

Mutare Article

Hi Diannaa, I was unaware that that particular section was copyrighted material, I had got it from a different website than the one you mention and hurriedly did so without putting it in my own words. I hope you realise that the work done to the article was in good faith and keep other sections of the Mutare article. Thanks for letting me know, I will be more diligent in the future.

It's all over the place; I found it on two different websites myself. Please don't copy from elsewhere online; pretty much everything is copyright. Everything you add here should be written in your own words please.— Diannaa (talk) 21:00, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

EdDSA removal

Hi Diannaa,

In this edit [8] you removed and hid some apparently copyrighted material from EdDSA. The removed material consisted of two sentences and two references. The sentences are easily rewritten and the references should not be a problem. Perhaps "The differences between the standards have been analyzed [REF1] and test vectors are available. [REF2]" Do you have any objection to my doing this?--agr (talk) 13:21, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

That version looks okay from a copyright point of view. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 13:30, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
Great. I've made the edit. Thanks for your help.--agr (talk) 15:44, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I have a question about a copyright infringement. Press Freedom Index lists full rankings copied from Reporters without borders site. I don't think the list is "lists based on factual data" per WP:TOP100. Copyright section of Terms and conditions says All text posted on the rsf.org website is the property of Reporters Without Borders. It is forbidden to reproduce, display, transfer, distribute or save all or part of any text, in any form, without prior written agreement from Reporters Without Borders. I created U.S. News & World Report Best Countries Rankings, but it was deleted as "Unambiguous copyright infringement of [9]". Thank you in advance.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 00:26, 18 February 2021 (UTC)

Since they use their own criteria as to how to arrive at the rankings, the resulting list is copyright. For this type of list we usually only show the top ten, or perhaps for a list of this type we might show the top ten for each year or even a few from the top ten and bottom ten for each year. I will list this at WP:CP so interested editors will have a little time to modify the article if there's anyone prepared to do that.— Diannaa (talk) 13:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply.I may try to trim the table if I have time. However there may be strong opposition to the modification. In that case, please help me to persuade the opponents. (already done by Diannaa)
My article U.S. News & World Report Best Countries Rankings was initially full rankings but trimmed to top 10 for avoiding the copyright infringement but deleted. Is it possible to undelete the article? Thank you.―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 20:56, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
The intellectual property section of the GCU of RSF says All the text, comments, works, illustrations and images reproduced or represented on the RWB website are protected worldwide by intellectual property rights, including copyright. Any total or partial reproduction or representation of the RWB site or elements thereof is strictly forbidden without RWB’s explicit prior consent. Any withdrawal or any re-use by means of permanent or temporary transfer of all or part of the content of any data on this site, by any means or in any form, is strictly forbidden. Reporters Without Borders, Reporters sans Frontières and RSF are registered trademarks and any use, reproduction or dissemination of these trademarks is strictly forbidden without RWB’s explicit prior consent., but users scrolling through the rankings table will find an advertisement by RSF promoting users to share the data online and in print form, seen just below the end of the table.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsslover371 (talk • contribs)
The place to go when requesting undeletion is to talk to the deleting administrator. The next step if not resolved is Wikipedia:Deletion review. — Diannaa (talk) 22:36, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Alright, thank you!―― Phoenix7777 (talk) 22:41, 18 February 2021 (UTC)
Who is the deleting administrator? Bsslover371 (talk) 00:32, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
This information can be obtained by clicking on the redlinked article. It was user:Discospinster— Diannaa (talk) 00:40, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio Stpetestan

Good morning (from EST),

Can you take a look into the edits of Stpetestan? Since you were the last admin to leave a message, the user's edits have not improved in quality, has added more copyright material (plagiarism) into articles, and has ignored advice from others. Any help would be appreciated, Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:05, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

User is currently blocked— Diannaa (talk) 19:55, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Martin Bormann

hi Diannaa, re: the recent edit warring, it also looks like the content may be a copyright violation, as at [10]. But I suspect you're way ahead of me on this. Thanks, 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 17:10, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Actually I did not know that Bob. Thanks for the tip.— Diannaa (talk) 17:12, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Barnstar

The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
Well, obviously, and with gratitude. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 17:22, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa (talk) 17:30, 20 February 2021 (UTC)

Dorset Police

There's still a huge amount of copyvio in the IPC section. For example the sentence "The book provides an insight into 'the methodical and transparent way in which the police investigate complicated crimes from riots to the almost perfect murders" is lifted directly from the Amazon review of the book. Many of the book, and programme summaries are copy/paste. Given that a lot of the entries are fairly trivial my suggestion would be to delete the whole section. --10mmsocket (talk) 10:50, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

...then if the original author thinks it's worthy of re-addition he can do so without the blatant copyvios. --10mmsocket (talk) 10:51, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
I didn't remove it because the sentence is a for the most part a quotation, with the only part being copied the phrase "The book provides an insight into".— Diannaa (talk) 13:08, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Spot checks of the IPC section reveal nothing.— Diannaa (talk) 13:56, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

new user on campaign: User:Primus Sanctus Don Bosco

Hello Dianaa- I'm trying to figure out the best approach to get a new editor on a campaign to slow down and communicate with others. Hoping you might be able to point me in the right direction. I'm assuming that posting on a noticeboard would be premature at this point. The editor has been active for two days, making similar changes across many articles related to Catholic clergy and buildings. A few of us have tried to get the editor's attention, but so far to no avail. The editor's contributions, and talkpage. Thanks in advance for any tips. Eric talk 13:27, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Sorry I can't help with this. Users of the mobile apps are extremely difficult to communicate with because they apparently are not properly receiving notifications. Unfortunately this editor does not have their email activated either. These users often don't even know someone is trying to reach them and newcomers may not even know they have a user talk page. The link to their user talk page is apparently also difficult to find, and they're unlikely to notice it unless specifically looking for it. See phab:T263943 re Android app and phab:T275117 for iOS app. See also Wikipedia:Village pump (WMF)/Archive 4#What we've got here is failure to communicate (some mobile editors you just can't reach). Coders on the WMF team are aware of the issue. Hopefully some coders will get on this soon as it's a really big flaw of the mobile apps.— Diannaa (talk) 13:47, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Ok, thanks for the info. That had not occurred to me. How unfortunate about the app notification issue. That must be causing no end of headaches now that so many people have been successfully programmed to live their lives through phone apps. Puzzling that so many apps have notification issues. It regularly occurs to me that my 2002 Sony Ericsson bar phone was better at such basic functions than the "smarter" devices I've had since. Eric talk 14:23, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Forgot to say, mobile IP editors, even those not using one of the apps, also receive no notifications and will be completely unaware of any talk page messages unless they think to hunt for them. The ticket for this issue is phab:T240889. The ticket bafflingly enough has been open for over a year.— Diannaa (talk) 14:34, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Help?

I am working on a project...In that regard, after drafting historical data regarding women's nationality here, I want to move all the sections on individual countries (when they are completed) to Fooian nationality law in a history section. I know that there is a template to use when translating one Wiki article to another to credit the original history, but in this case, I am not translating. I am also unsure, as the draft is not in mainspace, if I need to refer to it as the source, and if I do need to do that, how to note it. Can you help? Thanks! SusunW (talk) 15:05, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi SusunW! Hope you are well. What you are planning to do is to copy/move material from one Wikipedia article to another. When you do so, attribution is required. This is required regardless of the source article exists in draftspace, sandbox, or mainspace. This is done by saying in your initial edit summary (but later is okay if you forget) where you got the content from. Sample edit summary: Copied content from [[<page name>]]; see that page's history for attribution. It's also a good idea if you remove the material from the source article to say why in your edit summary. If you copy/move large amounts of text it's a good idea to place a {{copied}} template on the talk pages of both articles. See WP:Copying within Wikipedia for the full details.— Diannaa (talk) 15:21, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much. I knew you would be able to help me. Appreciate your expertise! SusunW (talk) 15:34, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Okay, so I have done one. Did I do it correctly? SusunW (talk) 16:11, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes, it is correct. But if the content in the sandbox was originally copied from elsewhere on Wikipedia, you need to say that too.— Diannaa (talk) 16:14, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
Nope, it wasn't. And when I deleted it from the draft, I marked in the reverse that it moved to ... Again, I truly appreciate your help. SusunW (talk) 16:22, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

And so now I am back. I am trying to add information to the article on United States nationality law. Unfortunately the topic is conflated with information which should be in Citizenship of the United States and vice versa. I would like to remove the information on citizenship, which discusses rights of nationals rather than becoming nationals, to the talk page for discussion about moving it to the other article. I am sure there is a notation I should use to do that, but am unsure if it is the same as the one you gave me above. Can you tell me in this instance, how I need to attribute such a move? SusunW (talk) 20:49, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Not trying to rush you, at all, but I gave it a shot. Is this okay? SusunW (talk) 23:09, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Those are ok. — Diannaa (talk) 10:47, 8 March 2021 (UTC)

WP:COPYWITHIN warning

I noticed you've warned a user in regard to WP:COPYWITHIN. It may be worth drawing your attention to your first warning to them in 2017, a related one in the following December then more recent warnings from me here then the following section, which also includes a warning from you. They don't seem to be taking heed. I'm not sure whether further action is appropriate or not but thought it best to flag their history. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:39, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

I've changed the header to indicate that it's the fourth request. This is not something I would block for. Usually I give a few warnings and if that doesn't work I do the attribution myself, or remove the copied material with an edit summary "remove unattributed copying"— Diannaa (talk) 14:46, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Pilsbury (family) article

Hello. I have amended my article and I hope hopefully amended the issues that you raised. I would be grateful if you revisited the article and shared your judgement. Many thanks. Historicalwriter1910 (talk) 17:03, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

The new version looks okay from a copyright point of view— Diannaa (talk) 20:36, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Would you be able to advise me on the next steps that need to be taken before the article is accepted and is ‘live’ on Wikipedia? Historicalwriter1910 (talk) 21:36, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Historicalwriter1910, there are currently 4,679 drafts in the queue awaiting assessment. Someone will hopefully get to it soon.— Diannaa (talk) 23:22, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Marci Liroff

Hi there - you just deleted an entire description of my new job as Intimacy Coordinator and I'm confused as to why. Your note said there was copyright information which I violated. I'm not aware of any copyright info which describes my job. Can you please inform me? Marci Liroff Selsid (talk) 15:17, 23 February 2021 (UTC) OMG, now I see you have deleted the entire portion about my work as a casting director. WHY??? I don't have a copy of that info and now it's all gone? Can you please explain what is the issue and how I can correct it? I've been a casting director for over 43 years. How did I violate copyright by listing my bio and resume? I sure hope there's a way to restore this. Thanks Susan. (I don't know how to speak to you or where to put these notes, sorry if they're in the wrong place. Marci Liroff Selsid (talk) 15:22, 23 February 2021 (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 yourself or your own organisation is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 20:33, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

Thx for your notes, but I'm really not understanding why you've deleted so much of my page. It's been up since 2009 (I believe) with no issues. Now that I added info about a new position on film and TV sets, most of everything has been taken down. What is the copyright issue? The description of the job was taken from my website which I created. I'm not violating anyone else's words. I wrote them.

I've been a casting director for about 43 years, have cast some amazing films, and worked with some of the pioneer directors. Are you saying that I'm promoting myself by listing these projects and my collaborations with these directors? Are this is a conflict of interest? It's actual fact that I've worked on these movies. Just very confused. Are you saying that I can't create a page about myself? Someone else has to do it? Who, in particular, has to do that? Thanks for your patience. Selsid (talk) 20:49, 24 February 2021 (UTC)Marci Liroff

Yes I am indeed saying that people should not create or edit their own Wikipedia articles. If people are notable, someone will likely create an article about them eventually. If you have things you wish us to add, you need to make suggestions on the talk page, not edit the article directly. We have a rule about unsourced content which applies especially to our biographies of living people - everything in them should be sourced to independent reliable sources such as newspapers, magazines, or reliable websites. Your own website is not a good source for an encyclopedia article, because you can put whatever you want there, without any sourcing to back it up. Regardless, we can't take your word for it that you are the copyright holder of that website; we need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have 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.
It doesn't matter how long the article has been in existence - Wikipedia articles can be amended, improved, edited at any time. Unlike websites such as LinkedIn or Facebook, the article is not yours to control. It's an encyclopedia article, not a social media post or a place to advertise. I think this covers all your questions? Let me know if I missed something.— Diannaa (talk) 21:02, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Article creation.

How do I create a history article on the same page? Habonuwa (talk) 04:31, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Habonuwa, I don't understand the question.— Diannaa (talk) 14:32, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Removal of Content on Copyright

Hello Madam, you recently did an edit to https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1008539054 whereby you removed all statutory provisions stating "remove quotations from the Act; legislation in India is copyright for 60 years from publication. Some of this is form the new Act"

I believe that you are mistaken, Indian law gives copyright protection for a period till 60yrs from the date of death of the author. This does not extend to statutes of Parliament or other legislative bodies. We are free to reproduce judgments. All these are not subject to copyright. Actually Indian Government promotes publishing of laws and Judgments so that everyone is acquainted of the Law. So i kindly request you to revert back the revision. You may reply for any further inquiry. I am a practicing lawyer in India. Rajesh vakkil (talk) 09:29, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

I checked in https://copyright.gov.in/documents/copyrightrules1957.pdf and it says it's copyright. If I am understanding it correctly, it says copies can be produced for the exclusive use of the legislature but that's all.— Diannaa (talk) 14:30, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Madam i believe you are referring to works of Legislative Secretariat, it has no relation with statute enacted by Legislature. They are like an executive body aiding Parliament in it's function and produces educational and news articles. Their content is subject to copyright. But here it is Act of Parliament, which is excluded in the PDF that you send.

You may refer s.52 which excludes copyright for Act of Parliament.

"(q) the reproduction or publication of— (i) any matter which has been published in any Official Gazette except an Act of a Legislature;" Rajesh vakkil (talk) 15:01, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

It also says in the paragraph above, "the provisions of this clause shall apply only if such reproduction is made at a time more than sixty years from the date of the death of the author or, in the case of a work of joint authorship, from the death of the author whose identity is known or, if the identity of more authors than one is known from the death of such of those authors who dies last;" so no.— Diannaa (talk) 15:30, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Requesting your help

I am requesting you for your help on the total box office collection of the film Spirited Away on the talk page of Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba the Movie: Mugen Train which has let to edit warring between me and a random IP user. Please help me in this regard as soon as possible. Details are mentioned on the talk page itself. Ichika Kasuga (talk) 2:55 Wednesday, 24 February 2021 — Preceding undated comment added 14:56, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Sorry I don't have time to look at this.— Diannaa (talk) 15:30, 24 February 2021 (UTC)
Its okay. Thank you🥰🥰 [[User:Ichika Kasuga|Ichika Kasuga]] (talk) (talk) 15:34, 24 February 2021 (UTC)Ichika Kasuga 15:31 Wednesday, 24 February 2021

One on One Football

Can you add One on One Football to Street Football (American) E Gardner16 (talk) 18:31, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

PD-notice

Thanks for your note and fix to the 88th Illinois Infantry Regiment article. When I intend to upgrade to a B class article, I first copy the Frederick Dyer material, then I make a series of edits until the article is entirely written in my own words. When I'm done, Dyer is cited normally. This time, I forgot to add the PD-notice or CWR tag after I did the copy. Djmaschek (talk) 19:56, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

No worries - sorry for the template; I am trying to reduce the time I spend online— Diannaa (talk) 20:18, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

ValerySablin

I noticed you warned this person about copyvios. I warned him on the 23rd about blanking cited text from articles. He seems to have simply removed the notices from his talk page, which I guess is allowed, but I'm thinking he warrants watching at a minimum. ♟♙ (talk) 01:49, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

The creativity of the index rankings does not relate to copyright, because they used scores to rank the countries. RSF's copyright policy claims to copyright the Press Freedom Index data as seen in their GCU, but they will promote users to help share the data online and in print form (including Wikipedia). Because of that, I would like the ranking table to be restored because their policy on the Index's data seems very misleading. Bsslover371 (talk) 06:05, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

If "RSF's copyright policy claims to copyright the Press Freedom Index data as seen in their GCU", then we can't copy it to Wikipedia, because it's copyright. Regardless of their intent for sharing, it's not possible for us to add the tables. Sorry but I am not going to restore it. If I believed it was okay to include the content in Wikipedia I would not have listed the article at WP:CP. Please don't make your case here on my talk page. Please post at WP:CP if you have any further evidence or remarks you wish to share. Other copyright specialists will assess the case and make the decision or give their input as to whether or not my assessment is correct. — Diannaa (talk) 14:33, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Does that mean that I should discuss at the WP:CP talk page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bsslover371 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
No. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2021 February 18.— Diannaa (talk) 00:30, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Voytek (producer)

Good morning Diannaa. I recognise your authority within Wikipedia, and see - with shock - that you have not only removed most of my expansions to this article, but also made my own revisions inaccessible to me for further work. You have also (hastily I think) edited and cut my additions, in a way which has introduced errors, omissions and mistakes. I am grateful for your concern; and I should tell you, that I am a full-time writer whose work for OUP includes many articles of this nature, and management of special projects on the theatre panel of our British national DNB. I do understand about fair usage (by OUP rules), and do my best to abide by those constraints, for every professional reason.

I came across the Voytek stub in the course of my researches for OUP, and seeing the startling notice to the effect that "this individual may not be of sufficient importance to merit a Wikipedia entry" decided, pro bono publico, to improve the article. Would it not have been more courteous to draw attention to particular instances here, where you felt I had been slack in paraphrasing the source obituary for my revisions? I would of course have been grateful to know of them. As it is, I am very disappointed to find that you did not extend me such courtesy. I will correct your more obvious errors and omissions, but am bemused to find my work treated in this cavalier way. Zarzuelauk (talk) 08:49, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I will make the necessary revisions later, when I have met some tight deadlines for paid work! Meanwhile, I have moved the page to more sensibly reflect the subject's main profession. Zarzuelauk (talk) 09:14, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
The reason the material was removed was because it was a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy, with some of the content you added being identical to the source web page https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2014/aug/15/voytek-obituary. Copyright issues 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, and for clear-cut violations it is not necessary. For the same reason, I normally do the revision deletion immediately, so that each case is completely finished when I leave the page. The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. I can send you the deleted text via email if you like, or you can go back to the Guardian obit and work from that.
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. You must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase.— Diannaa (talk) 14:06, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Diannaa - your explanation is much appreciated. I wish I had read it before reconstituting the article piecemeal from my head, but never mind that! I should have liked to have seen the evidence of my alleged copyright infringements, but that is water under the bridge: I have now revised and corrected the torso of the article, with an expanded reference and external links roster, smoothing out any inconsistencies. The exercise has enabled me to go deeper into research, including discovery of the online text of a valuable interview with the subject from 1960. (It may also lead to Voytek's inclusion in our Oxford DNB, but that's all for the future.)
As you will of course appreciate, when it comes to matters of fact, (e.g. "he won a second bafta for xx in yyyy") it is almost impossible to paraphrase without impossible circumlocutions, which are something we avoid at all costs in our professional work. That is where fair usage has to apply, and legally does so, at least here in the UK: and (as I am sure you know as well as I) published obituaries represent a particularly flexible case. You are clearly the Wikipedia expert: so if you remain dissatisfied with any aspects of my current edit, please feel free to alter any phrasing you consider too close to obituary sources. By the way, I was lucky enough to see many of Voytek's productions, and I even knew him (very slightly); so I am specially glad to be able to salvage his reputation a little on Wikipedia! Zarzuelauk (talk) 11:45, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Regardless how flexibly the UK looks upon copying from obituaries, it's the Wikipedia copyright policy that is not flexible. Job titles, names of schools, etc do not need to be paraphrased. Unique phrases such as "reliant on the absurdities of class and politics" or "one of his last TV projects" need to be paraphrased or omitted. — Diannaa (talk) 14:15, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Dianna. Your second example is a fine example of the potential absurdity to which I was referring. It is difficult (for me at least) to paraphrase the purely factual concept "one of his last TV projects" without slipping into semantic absurdity, yet - in this case - omission was not a viable option. The boundary between fact and expression of it must always remain grey. [In fact my researches indicate that it was his very last television project, so in this case the obit wasn't quite accurate, as is all too often the case]. Given your kind interest in this article, I thought you might like to know that I've now been formally commissioned by OUP to write the entry on Voytek for our DNB: though as of course I won't be able to quote any of my own careful phrases for Wiki, I feel a little like a woodcock caught on my own springe! Best wishes and thanks again, Zarzuelauk (talk) 10:15, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
You could paraphrase it - "his last project" would work, if he did no further projects in other media either. If you publish an article, you should not also use it as a source for Wikipedia.— Diannaa (talk) 11:39, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello again Dianna. It wasn't "his last project", as he did further work for the stage, so that would not do - as being only half the truth. I'm not quite clear what you mean by your last sentence. It goes without saying that of course I have absolutely no intention of using my researches for OUP (which will be their copyright, for which they will have paid me) to expand the Wikipedia article. I happily leave others to incorporate the fruits of my research, if they wish - though they will have to take care to paraphrase me, rather than quote me wholesale. What fun it all is! Zarzuelauk (talk) 11:43, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
"His last project for TV" perhaps. Glad you are enjoying Wikipedia, best wishes.— Diannaa (talk) 13:11, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Etruscan civilization copyvios

Hi Diannaa - hope you're well. A substantial amount of the "Genetic research" sub-section of the above seems to be a straight copy from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1181945/. I've removed the copyvio and warned the IP who added it. Unfortunately the material above it (within the same section) seems to be a very close paraphrase from the same source, added who-knows-when, though heavily wikified since then and credited to the same source.

See diff https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Etruscan_civilization&curid=37353&diff=1008837925&oldid=1008837190. That's as far as I got, so I've no idea how legal the rest of the section might be. For some reason, Earwig's detector didn't pick any of this up. As you're my "go to" for this kind of stuff... voila! Thanks a lot for your committment, and take care. Haploidavey (talk) 10:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi Haploidavey. The paragraph directly above seems adequately paraphrased to me. When it was added (Diff of Etruscan civilization) it had a little more overlap than it does now. I am not going to do revision deletion on that part, but I did on the new edit. — Diannaa (talk) 14:19, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I trust your judgment in this (I tend to be overcautious these days). Haploidavey (talk) 14:25, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Café Voltaire and Place de l'Odeon

Hi again Diannaa. I'm expanding Café Voltaire and Place de l'Odeon. I followed template's advice to "provide copyright attribution in the edit summary accompanying your translation by providing an interlanguage link to the source of your translation" - but thought I should let you know here in case they're flagged. Thank you. (Will also let User:Sphilbrick know.) -- HistoricalAccountings (talk) 11:57, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks HistoricalAccountings. Thanks for the update. The edit summaries are perfect. I will look carefully at the edit summaries if I see your name pop up at Copypatrol in the future.— Diannaa (talk) 14:22, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Help at the Draft: List of CSX Train Symbols

I want to edit the table with series A at the Draft: List of CSX Train Symbols and insert the words at the table.— Preceding unsigned comment added by General electric p30ch (talk • contribs) 18:02, February 27, 2021 (UTC)

Newberry Consort material

Sorry for adding this material. I had changed it a bit, but nothing major, so it's too bad, but must be deleted. Thanks for taking care of it. Douglasburton (talk) 17:22, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (Saudi Arabia)

Hope this meets with your approval. --Louis P. Boog (talk) 17:35, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

The new version is okay, though a little heavy on the quotes — Diannaa (talk) 23:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Note

Hey there, I saw your copyvio notice at Wefffrrr's talk page. For whatever it's worth, I think they're engaging in UPE. When I see someone (especially silent lone-wolf-types) dropping two, three articles a day, multiple days in a row, that just reeks. These cases often irritate me because usually I have to wait for their incompetence to be their undoing. Anyway, just wanted to vent I guess. Lol. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:57, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Diannaa/Archive_74&oldid=1110951154"