User talk:Landnama

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Landnama! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! ミラP@Miraclepine 15:25, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That is very kind! I am very much still a Newbie! I will check out the various links you have suggested, although I read a few before I started, such as the Five Pillars and the "how to start" info.

My best wishes to you! Landnama (talk) 20:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help me or direct me:

I just submitted my first new article, from my Sandbox.

After submission, I was instructed that "it would be best" to Move the draft page to my Sandbox while it is being reviewed.

Now, I want to check other things in my Sandbox, but I no longer have one!

Can you tell me what to do?

Thank you!!! Landnama (talk) 20:48, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Landnama! Your additions to Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably free and compatible copyright license. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation#License requirements.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 22:52, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa!Thank you for correcting any errors I have made. So that I can learn, and because I had NO intention of using copyrighted material, can you let me know what you removed? Thank you. Landnama Landnama (talk) 23:29, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying these matters. Landnama (talk) 04:34, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa!Thank you for correcting any errors I have made. So that I can learn, and because I had NO intention of using copyrighted material, can you let me know what you removed? Thank you. Landnama

I removed a lot of content copied from four different sources. Content was regarding archives, books, their journal, and their fellowships. — Diannaa (talk) 21:33, 25 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, got it! I need to rephrase, reorder, etc. In any case: Not just copy and paste. Many thanks for your explanation. Landnama (talk) 02:12, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Lourdes 07:45, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:OVERLINK

... and SLOW DOWN your editing in general until you have a better understanding of the policies and guidelines for contributing here!

WP:OVERLINK prohibits something you've been doing quite a lot of: linking to the wiki articles for common words and phrases, such as the names of countries or law degrees.

I'm honestly very frustrated, I can appreciate that you are enthusiastic and new, I'm new too, but I'm taking the time to read everything here carefully and not taking actions before I understand whether they're appropriate. You need to start doing the same.

I was blown away to see the thread below on your talk page, where you had to be told "it's not okay to copy and paste" from other sites? That isn't just a Wikipedia thing, that applies to every form of writing from elementary education onwards. I would encourage you, before you keep adding unnecessary changes to text, to go BACK and review your previous edits to ensure they make sense. For example, you added "Films set in Queens, NY" to a TON of articles, and a quick review showed very few of them mentioned that location a single time. Categories need to reflect the content of the articles, not something you saw or thought about the movie.

Please take the encyclopedia seriously, it is a TON of work for people to clean up after sloppy editing like this, and I'm very disappointed in what I've seen from your history so far. Slow down, learn the policies, and work on mastering one thing at a time, or your contributions here will all get reverted while making excessive work for other volunteers. Chiselinccc (talk) 11:46, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am on mobile and do not know how to create a proper WP link, here is the long-form hyperlink where you can review the guidelines regarding overlinking: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AManual_of_Style%2FLinking#What_generally_should_not_be_linked?wprov=sfla1 Chiselinccc (talk) 11:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You need to respond to concerns, and not just create sockpuppets like User:Fagur. When you see this, please follow the directions on the template to request an unblock.

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Courcelles (talk) 13:44, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Landnama (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

We have one computer for a family. My son has brought to my attention that there is concern that Fagur (his account) is a "sockpuppet" of my account, Landnama. That is not correct. As to the concern about "Overlink", which I have just seen: Fair enough, although I was only following what I had seen in other articles. Having said that, I always think: what would a non-English reader, coming to this article, know about a topic, and that is why I create a link. BUT: I have gotten the message and will cease and desist. IF I am unblocked. Also, my son (Fagur) will not "Overlink". He has seen these criticisms. Can I also note that I do not log in every day, so if a message is on my Talk page for a few days, it does not mean I am ignoring it. I would hope you have seen that I respond to (and change because of) criticism.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline. Checkuser block. Hollow reasoning by sock possibly holding other socks, given the extensive editing conducted over two months. Lourdes 06:23, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Landnama (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am sorry, but merely stating "hollow reasoning" is itself hollow. How am I to prove this allegation of having a sock puppet is untrue and unfair? There appears to be no process to prove these accounts are really separate. Just a decision made by an Editor and that's it: over, account permanently blocked. No one suggests that I have done any vandalism, only "Overlink"ing, which is fair but now I know. The only "problem" is that my son uses this computer too. And to state that "extensive editing" is indicative of "holding other socks" makes no sense, at least to me. On the contrary, if I have made many edits, which I thought is exactly what Wikipedia wants, then why would I create another account?? Overall, this reaction, without any "due process", is very disappointing. If this really is final, then please tell me how to delete my account (I have looked and cannot find out how). There is no point to having an account with a permanent block. I had really enjoyed contributing (I thought) to this project. Thank you.

Decline reason:

Per below — Daniel Case (talk) 06:28, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Dear Landmama, I will very briefly explain:

Fagur created on 13 September,[1] about an hour within the time you left your edit.[2]
Fagur leaves an unblock request mentioning "There are multiple people in this household. Fagur is not a sockpuppet of Landnama. They use the same computer (sometimes)"[3] in second person. Clearly, it's you who is leaving the unblock request.
Unblock request left on 22 September, minutes before your unblock request.[4]
Other edits such as this[5] by you and this by Fagur,[6] minutes around each other.

And there are other technical details with checkusers. I'm sorry but your reasoning seems very off. I will other administrators/checkusers to respond further. Thanks, Lourdes 08:59, 26 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Haim Baruh (November 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ldm1954 was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs to

meet any of the eight academic-specific criteria
or cite multiple reliable, secondary sources independent of the subject, which cover the subject in some depth

Make sure your draft meets one of the criteria above before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If the subject does not meet any of the criteria, it is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Sorry, but WP:NACADEMIC is a high bar which he does not quite meet. There are also many details which are not notable - all academics get grants and teach. Last, almost everything is primary, i.e. cites his or Rutgers info so is not independent. If you remove the WP:PUFF and can find major administrative positions then perhaps a revised version might make it.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Haim Baruh and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Ldm1954 (talk) 14:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Landnama! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Ldm1954 (talk) 14:52, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]