User talk:Noah Van Horne

Noah Van Horne, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Noah Van Horne! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! SarahStierch (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:24, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Causal equality notation

I reverted your changes to several articles where you linked to causal equality notation. As far as I can tell you invented that notation in a paper that only exists on arXiv, and is not even peer-reviewed and therefore not encyclopedically notable. I'll leave that article alone (although I think that is dubious as well) but I'll revert any additions to other articles. --Wrongfilter (talk) 21:16, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Causal equality notation

Hello Noah Van Horne! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Causal equality notation, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from https://www.proquest.com/docview/2724236206, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC BY-SA 3.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:Causal equality notation and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-enwikimedia.org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Causal equality notation, in their email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Causal equality notation. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Causal equality notation with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Causal equality notation saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! — Diannaa (talk) 15:04, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa, thank you for your services to Wikipedia! I am all for protecting copyrighted material.

You wrote that "this article appears to contain work copied from https://www.proquest.com/docview/2724236206 ". It turns out what you found is my Ph.D. thesis. I am a %100 author of that work, and I'm happy to provide a small piece of it to Wikipedia. Please let me know if I need to "officially" give my permission in some specific way.

Also, I made an effort to re-write much of what I added to the wikipedia article on Causal equality noation, using different words from in the thesis and scientific articles. But if I need to rewrite more, would it be possible for you to indicate specific sections which need to be rewritten?

Thank you again for your diligence.

Noah Noah Van Horne (talk) 17:43, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. So your options are to release the thesis under a compatible license, or to re-word it further so that it is no longer the same. — Diannaa (talk) 20:55, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa, I see that most sections have been restored except for the section which contains the "Economics example".

I have rewritten the text for the "Economics example" completely, so hopefully now it does not cause an issue with copyright violation. Noah Van Horne (talk) 21:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's problems all the way to the bottom of the article, not just the one section. see the iThenticate report at https://copypatrol.toolforge.org/en/?id=95194847 — Diannaa (talk) 23:36, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Diannaa, I have reviewed the iThenticate report, which was helpful. Both the sections "Economics example" and "Engineering example" have now been rewritten. These two sections, along with the section entitled "A more nuanced example", can now be unblocked.

In addition, I believe the work which you cited as being the source of copyright infringement, my PhD thesis, is not copyrighted. The website where my thesis was found is a large database. It is indicated at the top right of the page that the database itself is copyrighted. However, it is also specified that "ProQuest does not claim copyright in the individual underlying works."

This is consistent with the fact that I did not personally take any steps to copyright my thesis, and I expect I would be made aware if I released the rights for it to be copyrighted by another entity. (I said previously that I was the copyright holder, not because I copyrighted it myself but because I assume if anyone would automatically be the copyright holder by default, it would be me.)

Here is the link to the ProQuest website, for you to review: https://www.proquest.com/docview/2724236206 Noah Van Horne (talk) 15:38, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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. You are the copyright holder. So if you wish the content to remain on Wikipedia unaltered you will have to release it under a compatible license. — Diannaa (talk) 16:10, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you for explaining. Does it mean I need to release the whole thesis under a compatible license? I will have to think about this.

In the meantime, is it possible for you to restore the sections "Economics example", "Engineering example", and "A more nuanced example", which are no longer a copyright infringement? Noah Van Horne (talk) 16:31, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You would have to release the entire thesis under license. I am not going to restore piecemeal. Let me know when you are finished, and I (or one of the other copyright specialists) will assess at that time. — Diannaa (talk) 16:32, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In my view, all these problems arise because this is original research and the article is based on one primary source (cf. point 5 there). The lack of secondary sources also makes the notability of the subject doubtful. --Wrongfilter (talk) 17:04, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa, I have gone through the report and finished rewriting all sections of the Wikipedia article causing copyright issues. There should (hopefully) be no more copyright infringement. Noah Van Horne (talk) 14:09, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to do that, but I'm sorry to say that it's not enough. The wording is different but you are still presenting the same ideas in the same order with only superficial modification and using the same examples as illustrations. That's what we call Close paraphrasing and it's not allowed. — Diannaa (talk) 15:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining Close paraphrasing. I have removed several passages of text which made the page more complete, but are non-essential. I also removed or modified several examples. The Close paraphrasing issue should be resolved. Noah Van Horne (talk) 17:04, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Causal equality notation moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Causal equality notation, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:07, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Causal equality notation

Hello, Noah Van Horne. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Causal equality notation, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 14:06, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Causal notation

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Causal notation, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:37, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]