User talk:Florin Talasman

License tagging for File:Portrait of General Constantin Prezan, Chief of Romanian General Staff, at the general headquarters in Ivesti, 1917.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Portrait of General Constantin Prezan, Chief of Romanian General Staff, at the general headquarters in Ivesti, 1917.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:30, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Salut Florin. I saw you uploaded many images. Fair use is used for copyrighted images so that we can use them nonetheless in Wikipedia. However many of the images you uploaded are actually in the public domain. That means they can be used freely and that they should be uploaded on Commons. Read more here [1]. Fair use images can only be used in one single language edition of Wikipedia and at one single page. On the other hand public domain images can be used in any language edition Wikipedia in any page you want. This is why it would be significantly helpful to export the images you uploaded on Commons. Hopefully you will consider it. Keep the good work up, you've made some nice translations in the past. Cheers, Super Ψ Dro 22:32, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Great work on Paul Păltănea, that's a very good article! Dylan \| ✉ \| ✓ 16:17, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Article

I've been looking at your work on User:Florin Talasman/sandbox, amazing work! I hope you keep it up.

FatalFit | ✉ | ✓ 17:06, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

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 List of countries by received FDI, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless that text is available under a suitable free license. 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. For more information on this, see:

If you still have questions, there is the Teahouse, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page and someone will be along to answer it shortly. As you get started, you may find the pages below to be helpful.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! — Diannaa (talk) 12:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Diannaa!

When editing the page List of countries by received FDI, I used data from World Bank and OECD. Since the methods of data collection and interpretation by different sources often differ, clarification is necessary. I considered useful to make data easy understandable even by a non-specialist, so I added the (copied) definitions from the source pages, especially since the data labels were different - FDI, net inflows (WB) and Inward FDI flows (OECD). It wasn't a case of copying extended text from a book or website and pasting it into a Wikipedia article, those definitions were the only text that I have copied exactly, but starting the sentences with According to World Bank... and According to OECD..., respectively. Moreover, at the end of each sentence, I have added the reference corresponding to each source. In my opinion, when making a clarification about published information, anyone should use the exact arguments or explanations presented by the author, not a personal note. Am (was) I wrong? 🤔 Florin Talasman (talk) 15:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not okay to copy copyright material into Wikipedia, even if you cite your source. Short quotations are okay, but you didn't have any quotation marks. These paragraphs are a bit long to be added as quotes. — Diannaa (talk) 18:12, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"It's not okay to copy copyright material into Wikipedia". I totally agree with that, but as I've already said, it's not the case. The texts I have copied are definitions of the indicators that I have used in the table, and any table must include a proper presentation of all terms, otherwise the values cannot be understood correctly.

Moreover, if you will go to the mentioned webpage, and click the "Details" button, a pop-up window will open, and you will see there the definition that I copied exactly. On the very same window, you will find the text: "License: CC BY-4.0".

Therefore, I don't consider those definitions to be "copyright material" and believe they should not have been deleted. Florin Talasman (talk) 20:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The page that's licensed as CC BY-4.0 does not contain the definition, only a list. The World Bank definition is from this page, which is marked as "© 2023 The World Bank Group, All Rights Reserved." We have to assume that they really mean it. The OECD definition is from this page, which is marked as "© Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development", and their Terms and Conditions page says "Unless otherwise stated, the Material is the intellectual property of the OECD and protected by copyright or other similar rights." So you will either have to re-write the content in your own words, or add quotation marks. — Diannaa (talk) 21:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let me reply step-by-step:

«The page that's licensed as CC BY-4.0 does not contain the definition, only a list.»

Yes, that's correct, that's why I said that you need to click the "Details" button. A pop-up window will open, and you will find both the definition and the text "License: CC BY-4.0". If you can't open the pop-up window, I can send you a screen capture.

That page belongs to the Metadata Glossary. It contains the same definition as the page previously mentioned. Yes, that's also correct, the page is marked as "© 2023 The World Bank Group, All Rights Reserved." But, on the same page, below the definition, is written "License Type CC BY-4.0". If you can't find it, I can send you a screen capture as well.

«The OECD definition is from this page, which is marked as "© Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development", and their Terms and Conditions page says "Unless otherwise stated, the Material is the intellectual property of the OECD and protected by copyright or other similar rights."»

Because I wanted to be sure, I emailed OECD asking about the right to use their Data and definitions. They replied: "Except where additional restrictions apply as stated in our Terms and Conditions, you can extract from, download, copy, adapt, print, distribute, share and embed Data for any purpose, even for commercial use. You must give appropriate credit to the OECD by using the citation associated with the relevant Data, or, if no specific citation is available, you must cite the source information using the following format:    OECD (year), (dataset name), (data source) DOI or URL (accessed on (date)).    When sharing or licensing work created using the Data, you agree to include the same acknowledgment requirement in any sub-licenses that you grant, along with the requirement that any further sub-licensees do the same.    For more information about the use of OECD Data, we refer you to section “I. c) Data” from our Terms and Conditions that you can access at the bottom of every page, https://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions/. Thank you for your interest in OECD’s work. Best regards,  Gersa." I can forward you that email if you want to check it yourself.

Based on all the above, I am now sure that I did nothing wrong - copying of those definitions does not constitute copyright violation. Florin Talasman (talk) 15:29, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 29

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of countries by average elevation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crozet. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 17:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@User:JaGa Thx :) Florin Talasman (talk) 18:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion at WP:MCQ § Battle of Galiti photos

You are invited to join the discussion at WP:MCQ § Battle of Galiti photos. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:03, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]