User talk:Don't call me shorely

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Don't call me shorely, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us!

I, and the rest of the hosts, would be more than happy to answer any questions you have! SarahStierch (talk) 01:13, 9 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your user page

I deleted it after this deletion discussion. It was nominated because it was a cut-and-paste copy of the article Atlantic City, New Jersey. I am sorry that you were not notified of the discussion, but you had not edited for over a year, and then only on two days, so the nominator must have assumed you were inactive. Welcome back!

Copies like that are discouraged (and are technically copyright violations) because they lose the article history, which is necessary to provide attribution to the authors as required by the CC-BY-SA license terms.

User pages are intended for users to say something about themselves and their Wikipedia activities, if they choose, to help communication within the project. You are very welcome to make yourself a user page like that: see Wikipedia:User pages for more information.

Here are some other pages that you might find helpful:

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:58, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@JohnCD: Thank you for the explanation! I have returned from a long sojourn in Central Africa. Hoping to pick up again more often in helping this great project! Don't call me shorely (talk) 12:49, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GISAID content

While your introduction of content about GISAID+ is certainly welcome, you need to be more careful not to plagiarize text verbatim from copyrighted sources like BioSpectrum Asia. Not to worry, I have reworded the offending text, and I wish you happy editing! - AppleBsTime (talk) 16:44, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation

Your edit to GISAID has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. AncientWalrus (talk) 05:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The edit in question: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GISAID&diff=prev&oldid=1141012669&diffmode=source

I removed the violation in: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=GISAID&diff=prev&oldid=1146820138&diffmode=source AncientWalrus (talk) 05:01, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading edit summaries

You seem to have made a number of edits removing correctly sourced birthdates with incorrect/misleading edit summaries claiming the birthdates were unsourced and also weirdly mentioning WP:BLPPRIMARY. Can you explain why?

In this case for example, the birth date actually does seem to be sourced, and the source is not primary but a cricket website, so secondary? I'll revert the edit as a result.

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ibrahim_Khan_%28Pakistani_cricketer%29&diff=prev&oldid=1147715210&diffmode=source AncientWalrus (talk) 02:12, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You removed a lot of birth dates with incorrect justification. I reverted a few, can you revert the rest yourself? AncientWalrus (talk) 02:21, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After looking into this more closely, it seems that your removal of day/month is in line with WP:DOB.

So your actions were correct, just the edit summaries were misleading, as the DOB was sourced - however the date/month shouldn't have been included. I'll remove the warning - sorry for that. AncientWalrus (talk) 13:45, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]