User talk:NortyNort/Archive7

Lam Pra Plerng

Hi NN:

I'm new to Wikipedia but am going to try to add some material to the LPP page based on my residency there when the dam was built in 1963 and also on my current part time residency there. I spell it differently than the article leader but I won't try any change there without further discussion. Anyway I'm glad to see that some people take an interest in this and hop I can add some stuff that will be interesting and helpful, asking for some patience from more experienced users for any msitakes I might make.

Jackswelters

Hey Jack, you are referring to Lam Phra Phloeng Dam, right? You are most welcome to make additions to the article. I will watch it and help you along if you have any problems with the coding or policy. If you have any specific questions about the article, you can bring them up at Talk:Lam Phra Phloeng Dam. I added a welcome message to your talk page which has some links to help you out as well. One of the biggest things to remember is to use and cite reliable sources. If you need anything else, let me know.--NortyNort (Holla) 09:02, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Article Recep Tayyip Erdoğan

Hi,

On the article you mentioned, my referenced contributions have been removed by vandals numerous times. It was I who requested the semi-protection. I and other users who I do not even know have been reverting the edits of these vandals and the reason was vandalism. After the protection they make this vandalism with their user accounts. I am not sure whether reverting edits of vandals violates WP:3RR. I should check this. --Inspectortr (talk) 18:41, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey, I responded at the article's talk. If more than more editor reverts you and if it happens more then twice, the best thing to do is discuss it on the talk.--NortyNort (Holla) 22:02, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Hidase/Millennium Dam

Hello,

Great job on the Millennium Dam page! I'm sorry for not catching it. However, the dam's name has been changed, so I combined the two articles under one name, the current one, and added a number of facts. I hope that is all right with you.--Simfan34 (talk) 21:16, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

I see nothing in your sources that show the name has changed. The only reference given that refers to it as the Hidase Dam is an unreliable blog. I also cannot find anything in sources to support this name change. If Hidase Dam was the original name, it can be mentioned in the Millennium Dam article. I have to reverse your redirect not only because of the actual name but because you did a cut and paste move. See WP:MOVE for the proper way to move a page in the future. I do not think this page should be moved back to Hidase Dam but if you believe so, please request a move atTalk:Millennium_Dam and list your reasons.--NortyNort (Holla) 01:32, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Here are several sources concerning the name change:

http://www.waltainfo.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=26352

http://www.zehabesha.com/?p=68

http://debrebirhan.blogspot.com/2011/04/name-of-grand-millennium-dam-changed.html

http://danielberhane.wordpress.com/2011/04/17/ethiopia-millennium-dam-gets-a-council-and-new-name/

There were also several facts contained on the page I had as compared to yours that I think merit inclusion.--Simfan34 (talk) 16:43, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I was looking for a name change to "Hidase Dam" like your article, but I see it was "Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam". I will look more into it today and see to have it moved. Any information you had that is pertinent can be included in the article. I see you had a section on the name changes.--NortyNort (Holla) 00:43, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Ruth Glass

Dear NortyNort,

I have noticed your comment on Ruth Glass Copyright problem - here at Wikipedia:Copyright_problems#19_May_2011. I am just writing to ask if I am allowed as the writer of the article - the perpetrator of the "problem" to debate the issue at that page. I had a line by line analysis of the article on my talk page with comparisions of the bits of the text which I have now put onTalk:Ruth Glass. The sources used were cited and included the ODNB, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography not the article[1] refered to on the accusation which is a summary of the ODNB. It really seems a bit much to claim this is close paraphrasing. Anyway can you offer me advice - should I just wait and see what happens or might I contribute in someway to the discussion. (Msrasnw (talk) 09:58, 28 May 2011 (UTC))

Hey Msrasnw. Sure, you can comment there as you are involved. An administrator will look it over shortly and close the issue. I didn't see much close-paraphrasing in the article, but I see where concerns came from. Maybe two sentences will need to be rewritten. I am sure everything will work out soon.--NortyNort (Holla)10:19, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks I have replied there (expressing my desire to be cleared of the charge) Best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 10:45, 28 May 2011 (UTC))

I don't think you're being charged or convicted with anything. Mistakes, even if coincidental, happen and we have to assume good faith. It's the editors that repeatedly and blatantly violate copyrights that are charged...and blocked.--NortyNort (Holla) 11:01, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Jim Chapman (Canadian)

Hi I got your message about the copyright infringement, but I was under the impression that it was just the second paragraph (since deleted) that was the problem. I read it over a few times, and looked at some other, similar articles, and realized that the offending paragraph was unnecessary, so I just deleted it. Also, yes, there is a bit of a conflict of interests, in that he is my uncle, sorry for not mentioning that before, I was unaware I should have. Goodbucket (talk) 20:31, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

I saw you had removed some text but there was more from another source as well. I see the article was recently deleted as a recreation. You are not required to declare a conflict of interest but it is good to do so. Another editor can overlook your edits. In the end, it is best for most to avoid COIs completely.--NortyNort (Holla) 11:47, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

Thats strange, that was the only place that I directly quoted (at least intentionally). I did that "earwig" test thing, and it didn't show any other problems. Do you happen to remember what the other source was? As for the deletion, I fixed the problem that the page was deleted for, a lack of secondary sources (there were around 35 different sources this time if I remember correctly), and I have explained this to Bearcat on his talk page, and I'm currently waiting for a reply. Thanks in advance for that source.Goodbucket (talk) 00:21, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

The suspected source is here. You can see the text comparison with a cached version of the page [2].--NortyNort (Holla) 00:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm really sorry if I'm wrong, but most of those seem to be the names of things, and can't be changed. For example, "heart and soul" is the name of one of his books, and "the jim chapman news hour" is the name of his show. I will (if the article is allowed back up) change the phrasing of "rockabilly legend ronnie hawkins" and "jim chapman's incontinentals a vocal based 50's", but the rest can't really be changed. Please correct me if I'm wrong. Goodbucket (talk) 00:38, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, the article wasn't deleted for being a copyright violation. I left you a message on your talk just to let you know the process of donating copyrighted material because one of your edit summaries indicated you had permission. I didn't see much of a problem with the text when I looked at the article because apparently, you had already removed it from the article. The only problematic (paraphrasing) sentence I see in that report is "jim chapman's incontinentals a vocal based 50's"; look at the text before and after it.--NortyNort (Holla) 00:45, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your help, I really appreciate it. Any advice on what to do about it being deleted? I thought that 35 would be enough sourcesGoodbucket (talk) 00:51, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Ask the administrator who deleted it to restore it and place it in your user space or back on the article space since it had references. The problem cited in the deletion dicussion wasnotability so references in general may not suffice. It seems you had some third-party independent sources in there but I can't see a lot of them because URL links weren't provided. Good sources to denote notability cover the person extensively and primarily, not just mentions.--NortyNort (Holla) 01:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks again for your time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Goodbucket (talk • contribs) 01:05, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem and good luck.--NortyNort (Holla) 01:07, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Hello, NortyNort. You have new messages at Template talk:Did you know.
Message added SusanLesch (talk) 01:44, 30 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Copyright query

I wonder if you might be able to offer some advice re: copyright? I am trying to close down caste warring at Nair, one aspect of which is the subdivisions into which the caste is divided - a highly contentious issue that is frequently edited without citations etc.

I have drafted a collapsible table on a spare bit of acreage in my userspace - see here. The table is a straight copy from an academic journal because there really is no other way to present this information. As you will see, it is cited (although in the draft version the citation is incomplete, it will work correctly & completely when inserted into the WP article). I will add citations for each column heading when it is copied over, as per the table printed in the journal.

This is quite a big chunk of copying. Will I get away with it, given that there is no other way to present the info succinctly? No worries if you do not have the time and/or inclination to check it out. Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 10:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey Sitush. Here is an essay on lists and copyrights. I am not familiar with caste details but if that information is fact than it is okay to use. If it is the opinion of that author then the situation may be a little more difficult. Opinionated lists tend to be cut-down to smaller sizes. For example, at The 500 Greatest Songs of All Time, only 10 appear because of copyright issues. That number was based on a consensus. Hope that helps.--NortyNort (Holla) 10:46, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Ouch. This is going to be messy. The journal author is setting forth the opinions of five other anthropologists as to who ranks where in the caste system. He is just listing them but there are clear differences in the opinions of those people, albeit they all used academic methodology to derive their conclusions. I have read the essay and am no wiser for it! Looks like I'll have to call in Moonriddengirl, which I was trying to avoid doing because of taking up her time when she has her new liaison responsibilities to fulfil also.

There is absolutely no point in cutting the list down. If that is done then it may as well not exist at all because its entire purpose is to shut down various arguments along the lines of "my dad's better than your dad". I'll ask MRG to take a look at this thread, if that's ok with you? - Sitush (talk) 11:15, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Yea, I have no problem of course, she has more experience in this area. I think if you attribute the author it should be good IMO. If there is no standard list, it has to be in whole and it is recognized, I think it qualifies under fair-use.--NortyNort (Holla) 11:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Oi. :/ Lists are so complex. All right; she does not own the opinions of the people she is citing, but she does own the format of her presentation and her choice of selection. Why those five anthropologists? Are there other anthropologists who hold different opinions? Why are the anthropologists listed in that order? It isn't alphabetical. Why are the subdivisions listed in that order? They aren't alphabetical, either. I suspect that she would be able to claim copyright on the list based on those elements of selection. She chose the anthropologists worth paying attention to; she weighted them somehow. I don't believe that her claim to copyright is a strong one, but I suspect it's there.

Depending on the article itself, NortyNort is probably right that you could claim fair use, but in order to comply withWP:NFC you'd need to attribute your source in line, not just in footnote. And you'd need to use it as part of sourced commentary on the question, not just reproduce it because it's convenient for us to do so. --Moonriddengirl^(talk) 12:31, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

1. They are the only anthropologists to have classified these people - no choice, given the need for completeness
2. The is top-to-bottom by order of rank, according to each anthropologist. The entire point is to show the ranking, so other than reversing it ...
3. I have no idea why it is in that order cross-ways. I would have done it from earliest classification to latest, which would mean swapping two columns round. There is no explanation for the order in the text, but the one that stands out is it keeps the similarities in the top ranks in adjacent columns.
4. The table would be slotted into the existing sourced commentary in the article.

HTH. - Sitush (talk) 12:37, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

How do you know that they are the only ones? There are a lot of anthropologists in the world. I'm not familiar with this area, but if they were chosen because they were the only anthropologists of note (in her opinion), then it still applies. If you use it under fair use, you must retain as she had it. If you are absolutely convinced that the only creativity in the list is in the cross-ways organization, then you should rearrange it. I'm afraid there really are no definitive answers in these kinds of question. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:40, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Well, they were the only ones at the time of him writing in 1975. It is apparently a very specialist area of study and, in fact, the same names pop up time and again in bibliographies, GSearches, article/book citations etc. I've decided to run with it "as is". I added the numbering of the ranks and a text attribution in the heading. I don't see as there is much more that I can do in the circumstances, and it is a lot better than what was in another article (which completed misrepresented what the academic said but claimed that he said it anyway! - I removed all that content). Thanks to both of you for your help. If I get called up for copyvio then at least I can say that I did seek some opinion before doing it (although the fault would still be mine). -Sitush (talk) 15:12, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Advice for clerks

Hope you don't mind, but it's live. :) It seems ready to go, and I've also officially enacted the consensus at VPR. Clerks are "go". And I created Template:CPC/table, which is only semi-protected, and transcluded it to the edit notice so that it can be updated without admin intervention. Does it look okay to you? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 16:14, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Nice, I hope this all works out. CPC looks really good. I feel I may memorize the codes now instead of just looking for colorful shapes and words. Could you transclude Template:SCV to SCV as well? I made a new notation template there yesterday and am having the same problem. Thanks.--NortyNort (Holla) 23:11, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I can't, but it's a bit complicated, because first we have to move the list to a separate page. I can't transclude the "documentation" page it's currently on to the SCV header, because it will include the categories and everything else. I can't use<includeonly> or <noinclude> on the documentation subpage, or it won't transclude properly toTemplate:SCV. It's a bit of a pain. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk)23:34, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Oh, that sounds complicated. Could you add {{SCV|M}} to the existing edit notice though?--NortyNort (Holla) 23:55, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Done. :) I just pasted the whole example usage field over. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 00:28, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Sweet, thank you.--NortyNort (Holla) 00:31, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Kölnbrein Dam

Hi NN, a quick scan of the German article picks up the following points:

• The Malta power stations are a range of hydropower stations in Carinthia, Austria, consisting of 3 stages, the upper one includes Kölnbrein Reservoir, the largest in Austria
• Upper Stage
  • Kölnbrein Dam
  • Kölnbrein Reservoir is the heart of the Malta power station system. Its catchment area is insufficient, so several streams are fed into the Galgenbichl pre-reservoir and water pumped to Kölnbrein, 200m higher
  • Galgenbichl Power Station uses water from Kölnbrein to generate electricity; surplus power is used to pump water back up to Kölnbrein
• Main Stage
  • Galgenbichl [Pre-]Reservoir
  • Gößkar Compensating (?) Basin, 10 km away, provides additional storage capacity and is linked to the system
  • Rottau Power Station
• Lower Stage
  • Mölltal Power Station uses water for the 3rd time in the system to generate electricity
  • Rottau Compensating (?) Basin

It seems its all one large interconnected system with several dams, reservoirs, basins and power stations. Does that help at all?--Bermicourt (talk) 19:18, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Mölltal means Möll Valley (the Möll being a river) and Möllbrücke is Möll Bridge. I think that Kraftwerk Mölltalrefers to the entire power station of the "lower stage" (Unterstufe) including the powerhouse, the Rottau compensating basin and weir, whereas Kraftstation Möllbrücke just refers to the powerhouse itself. HTH. Bermicourt (talk) 16:29, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Empire Dawn

I misread the source, the captain of the German ship was aquitted on that charge, although found guilty of others. New hook written to reflect this and additional sources added to article. Mjroots (talk) 12:42, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I responded there and will keep an eye on the entry.--NortyNort (Holla) 12:56, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Srebrenica genocide

Thanks for that ultraprompt response! Opbeith (talk) 11:05, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem!--NortyNort (Holla) 11:17, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

A question about WP process, plus a suggestion regarding case studies for tracking down reverse copyvio

Norty, now that MRG has new duties, she may not be able to be as responsive to requests at her talk page. I know you are becoming quite active in the area, and have a lot of Copyright knowledge. Do you have any thoughts onUser_talk:Moonriddengirl#Process_question_and_a_specific_question?

By way of introduction, I'm very interested in the subject, but the more I learn, the more I realize how much there is to know. I'm picking around the edges, deleting a lot of unambiguous copyvios, but still learning the ropes in terms of how to determine whether something is a reverse copyvio. As a suggestions, I wonder if it would be helpful for some who have done this to wrote up a couple case studies. I'm familiar with Wayback machine but don't have many other ideas on how to identify earlier versions of sites other than Wikipedia. SPhilbrickT 12:22, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey Sphilbrick, MRG covered the subject well and I don't have many thoughts to add. Entries are never removed once added and that is apparent at WP:SCV where over half of the daily entries are usually deleted. I am not an admin but can check a specific article's log to see why it was deleted or if it had been before. Normally though, I pass over redlinks, especially at SCV.

I think case studies is a good idea, it can help people learn easier. I will keep track of them. Reverse copyvios can be difficult but once you know what to do, it isn't so bad. The Wayback machine is a key tool and from my experience, it keeps the best archives on U.S. websites. I ran into a case recently where the web address cited in the copyvio report had changed since the copyyvio and I only knew that because the person who introduced it had cited it. The reported address had no archives but the old one did. If there are no archives, there are a few options: looks for other sources of the text and Google the URL and see how far a Google cache goes back. I have yet to encounter a case where I couldn't determine who copied first. If I do one day, well, I'll see what MRG says. I assume it would be best to remove the text. Usually though, if you have no archive, you can search for pieces of text from the source in the Wikiblame tool. Normally, if text in a source is slightly different from past revisions of similar text in a Wikipedia article, they copied from us. There are also other indicators such as past copyvio patterns from the editor in question or if multiple editors contributed to a presumed copyvio. It is unlikely that multiple editors would coincidently add text from another source and it eventually look just like the source. I started out like you, removing obvious copyvios I came across and at NPP then I saw CP and SCV and decided to help out.--NortyNort (Holla)13:20, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Oops, I don't think she had answered when I asked, or I failed to refresh. Will check her response.SPhilbrickT 13:29, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Regarding reverse copyvios, it is exactly that type of thinking that should be codified in case studies. I knew a couple of the ideas you mentioned, but some were new. If I get a few minutes, I'll try to mock up something.SPhilbrickT 13:33, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, well I will contribute. There was one today at Talk:Srebrenica massacre. Usually when articles have the backwards copy tag on their talk, there is an explanation. So, by lookinghere, we can see every talk page with such tag. Some explanations are more detailed then others.--NortyNort (Holla) 13:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for that example. I'd heard elsewhere that there was a reverse copyio related to the Srebrenica massacre, but I hadn't looked at it until now.

I'm working on one now, a second pair of eyes would be good. If it turns out we can definitely resolve, I would be tempted to write it up as a case study.

See discussion at

Hello, NortyNort. You have new messages at Whpq's talk page.
Message added SPhilbrickT 23:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I responded there and had to remove most of the text from the article. The page name for the bio had changed over the years. In cases where you see no archive for a year or so, check the archives of the home page and you will more than likely see those gaps filled. Pick a date and then click your way to the page you want to see an archive of; in this case, the bio. The archive tool will continue to show you archived versions as you navigate.--NortyNort (Holla) 12:06, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Good work. I had hoped this would turn out to be a reverse copyvio, but it is what it is. I see the elements of a good case study - first blush, obvious match between WP article and Official Page under copyright. But not so fast, the WP page isn't recent, and has been around since 2006. Have to figure out which came first. Wayback is helpful, but has gaps exactly at the crucial dates, so poke around to the home page, find out the bio page had a different name, and then find the solid evidence.--SPhilbrickT 12:54, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Yup, I can help you draft that study. I wanted to work on some tonight but I had a rough day at work today and am drained. From my experience, websites on a subject won't copy from us. It is most often the websites that store information on various subjects that pull from us.--NortyNort (Holla) 13:06, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Hawizeh Marshes‎ Copyright/plagiarim issues

Friendly manual copyright warning

Dear Nortynort, just a little note to raise some possible worries about some overly close paraphrasing or plagiarsim on Hawizeh Marshes. In particular some paragraphs seem just word for word copies. This thing seem to identify quite a lot of problems:

Duplication detection on Hawizeh Marshes

I might well have made a mistake in which case - sorry.

I am clearly prompted by my being a bit annoyed with my Ruth Glass experience and the treatment at copyright problems that I got but ... and so should apologise for this anyway and I realise editing in anger is a mistake but we all get angry sometimes. Sorry and best wishes (Msrasnw (talk) 15:16, 1 June 2011 (UTC))

Oh no! My first article. I guess I did do that. I appreciate you pointing that out because I don't even remember that and it was long before I knew a lot about copyright. However, scanning through my articles to seek retribution for issues with Ruth Glassisn't the way to handle things, as you noted. The article wasn't a terrible situation and multiple editors felt the same way about portions of the text. You can just rewrite those areas again and expand the article. Your temp was already included.--NortyNort (Holla) 21:39, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Jolly sorry it was bad of me - and particularly sneaky to check your first article.... but at least I did't go down the full copyright case root. But I am still annoyed at the process on Ruth Glass and angry with how it was done. I started the article and was editing it when the copyright thing was raised within about twenty mins of the start and within a muinute of an edit. Another editor removed the thing saying no way was it a copyright violation and then the copyright patroller takes it for the full works. All within about half an hour. And it was still a very marginal case. Two lines in it were potentially problematic - but only one of them a real problem - but that just some slight adjustment - or as is now rather clumisly done - direct quotation. The other line was the ODNB using Glass's own pharses. I had expected those looking at the case in copyright problems to address the issue of whether it was appropriate to bring this so quickly to copyright problems rather than to rasie the issue more directly on the Glass talk page or with me and I specifically raised my worries and really just got - yes it was close paraphrasing - no indication that this was the wrong way to deal with this case. The one who started the thing refered me to MRGs page claiming there was an apology there - but there didn't seem to me much of one - but since I had some earlier warnings on my talk page (due I think to the over eager newpage patrollers) - then I might be a problem and could be a case for Contributor copyright investigations.

Since I had been given Autopatroller status I had thought to have escaped this sort of thing. I used to get any new article attacked almost straightaway. But this seemed to have stopped and I had been editing much more happily until this. I don't know how this got started in this first place.

I raise this at length with you as I think you are now going to be heavily involved with this sort of thing and I may not be alone in finding some of the ways this sort of thing is dealt with are very heavy handed.

Anyways I am still annoyed with this - so perhaps should move on to something else.

Best wishes and sorry again for the sneaky attack (Msrasnw (talk) 10:30, 2 June 2011 (UTC))

Well, I can't see the first article because it was deleted and replaced with the temp. I remember there was two questionable sentences. Usually if I come across an article like that, I try to reword it or just remove the two sentences. I usually only use{{copyvio}} if there is a lot of close paraphrasing or a foundational copyvio that is hard to remove. The template is big and embarrassing; it should be used only when necessary. Some people are unsure and just use it. I had read through most of the conversation atMRG's talkand the tag-placer knew they could have handled it better. I wouldn't sweat it and move on. You should archive your talk page in general though, it is pretty long and old. I accept your apology. I will take the best out of the situation which is that a problem was fixed and that I can assume more easily assume good faith when new editors when they make the same mistake. I honestly don't remember doing that. When I first started editing, sometimes I would paste the source text in the edit pane and read it while writing the article. I checked some of my other early edits today, looks like that was the only problem.--NortyNort (Holla) 11:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Case studies - preliminary thoughts - very rough

This is an extremely crude start. Can I emphasize "extremely"? I'm only witting it now because I will be out of town until the 15th of June, and I wanted to put down some of my thoughts before I forgot them.

My goal is to have a page with some general discussion of the investigation process, a list of the tools available to investigators, and a half dozen or so case studies to illustrate how to go about an investigation.

I'm still a neophyte at this, so would hope to supplement the cases with some examples form You and MRG and some of the other experienced editors.

I don't think there's any rush, I'll try to put some more structure together later in June, but I wanted you to see what I was thinking.--SPhilbrickT 01:43, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, looks like a start, I can add to it if you don't mind. Ultimately, I think it will be a good page to link atWikipedia:Copyright problems/Advice for clerks, Wikipedia:Copyright problems/Advice for admins and Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. It is the most difficult to investigate and a how-to would be good.--NortyNort (Holla) 02:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing me to those other pages. I was thinking there should be some general advice, in addition to the case studies—looks like the general advice is in good shape, glad I didn't spend too much time on that aspect:) I'll rewrite to be more of a pure case study list, and is it gets into decent shape we can link it from some of those sites you listed. Of course, feel free to edit or supplement. In particular, I'm not sure how you figured out to look for http://www.singingcookes.com/bio.htm. I looked at the home page and didn't see it. If you just guessed, good for you. If you found it by looking at the home page, I'd like to document it. I also saw that IA suggested a list of possible pages, and thought it might be there, but didn't see it, although I was skimming. In any event, I'd like to accurately state what you did, and I'm guessing a bit on that step. Feel free to tell me, or edit it.--SPhilbrickT 13:53, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem! I just looked at the archive for http://www.singingcookes.com/ and then click the bio button on the top which led me right to it. When I noticed there was no archiving done on biography.html for two years but there was for years before the gap, I figured there was a name change. I can add that in your case studies here soon.--NortyNort (Holla) 14:26, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for checking that High-Performance Parallel Interface, a long-standing copyvio, was not a mirror. Due diligence is great, keep it up. - 2/0 (cont.) 03:06, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem, just part of the process. I wanted to try and stub it but it's not my expertise. Thanks for taking care of the process' second-half.--NortyNort (Holla) 03:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problem in the Spiral model

Hi NortyNort, could you take an other look at copyright problem in the spiral model article, and the comment I gave on the talk page. Thanks, you. -- Mdd (talk) 21:44, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I took a look and left comments.--NortyNort (Holla) 23:59, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Wow

		The Barnstar of Herculean Labor
		For facing and defeating the monstrous tasks atWikipedia:Copyright problems/2011 May 26, which would have left many a less-heroic user in shambles.--Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:58, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Color me deeply impressed. I'm glad most days aren't like that. :/ You've probably single-handedly saved the CP board from tremendous backlog, since my job doesn't give me much spare time during the week these days. But I'm working towards getting more clerks into the system, which I hope will help keep it from becoming overwhelming. :) --Moonriddengirl^(talk) 13:58, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! I dreaded that day as I saw it coming. I figured just get through it as the rest aren't the same. I am thinking of ways to recruit as well, as being discussed at WT:CCI. Even with two clerks, there would be much less work.--NortyNort (Holla) 22:33, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Earliest edit

Hi. :) Re: your note here, I have done this myself more than once, but the content was not actually placed by him; I always try to remember to check to see if "earliest" at the bottom of the page is a bluelink. The article was actually created in December 2006 by User:Pbha, whom I notified. I left a note under yours to Wknight, but feel free to remove both if you'd like.

Very discouraging to find a missing day in that run. :D BTW, I've now solicited several potential CP clerks: Dpmuk and Belovedfreak. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:51, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Whoops! Thanks for pointing that out. I was baffled as the user seemed in good standing, even during that period. I usually use better judgment, I struck the comment I left on the talk page. Missing day, are you referring to VWBot accidentally removing days from CP? I happened for the 23rd too, I had my hopes up :(. I was thinking of asking Belovedfreak whom I've seen at SCV. Hopefully it goes well, thanks.--NortyNort (Holla) 12:01, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Yup, that's what I'm talking about. I'm trying to knock one of them out this morning but it's making me run a few minutes late for work. :D --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Not just a copyright issue, but one that lacks any inline sources.

Hi- good faith message- re: Dana Fuchs. Granted, I was hours away from the hospital, so I wasn't in top form, & perhaps selected a less specific banner for that article, however... I built the infobox, found a photo, which I uploaded to Commons and added, and, no, I don't want to be the lead editor there. However, I've done the same for over 1,500 BLPs over the years. I noticed there weren't any Inline references (or any for that matter) in the article last week. I added a reference section, in which nothing was placed by anyone since. While I admire your determination to removecopyright violations, please think first about other issues, too! I had placed a banner- but returned to find no new references, and that the banner was removed!? I assume you removed it in good faith, and because you are a newer editor. We are working toward the same goal here, but it can't be reached if one just removes a banner for an unsourced article! It would have been best to leave a note on my talk page-- considering that I can't keep track of a watchlist that has thousands of articles on it (though I do give you credit for a note on the talk page). I added the appropriate banner. In the future, please consider notifying the person you are reverting. (Recently, a consensus was reached to delete new biographies that were unreferenced, too!)--Leahtwosaints (talk) 03:53, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Hmm, I think it was an accident. I may have removed the text and your reference tag by accident when I should have removed{{copypaste}}. In my next edit, I removed the copypaste tag. So, I probably inadvertently removed the wrong tag first. Sometimes I forget to remove the text along with the tag and have to remove the tag in the next edit. My apologies. I am aware of BLP policies and try to take care when removing copyvios; re-adding infboxes and such when I restore an older version.--NortyNort (Holla) 06:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for La Esmeralda Dam

Materialscientist (talk) 18:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Regarding your modification over "Joey Foster Ellis"

Hi NortyNort,

Thanks for the message. Actually the copyright issue is solved since the author of http://cn.linkedin.com/in/josephfosterelliscontacted with wikimedia and he permit its use under the terms of the Creative Commons and the GNU Free Documentation License. Ticket number is [Ticket#2011060310001185] and Chris Kelly was replying to the email. Please check it and return the previous content back.

Thank you and wish you have a nice day!

Ellen.clementia (talk) 12:00, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey Ellen, once it is confirmed, the OTRS agent will restore the text and tag the talk page of the article. For now, I added{{OTRS pending}} to the talk page. I am not an OTRS agent and cannot confirm that use of the text is verified and did not know a ticket is pending. In the future, please indicate in an edit summary or on your/the article's talk page. Thanks for letting me know though!--NortyNort (Holla) 12:25, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Youtube video

Epic LOL. Man, 9 minutes of pure comedy. This has to go somewhere, we don't find things this hilarious that often!Rehman 13:18, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Hahaha, yea. I couldn't believe it. A video response is rare I guess, I have never seen one. If he would have been welcomed, maybe he would've understood policy better. I liked him verifying the copyright for his website at the end.--NortyNort (Holla) 20:48, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for New Waddell Dam

Materialscientist (talk) 06:04, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Adelaide Arena

Hi,

Whilst I agree with your removal of the copypaste tag for that particular url, I think parts of the Wikipedia article may in fact be a copyvio of here (from Jul 2008) andhere (from Jan 2007). It's all a bit confusing as there seem several similar websites with similar text. I was halfway through investigating but RL interrupted and I just put the article on my watchlist (and then your edit reminded me of the article). Just a heads up. regards, ascidian | talk-to-me 18:56, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Just when the coast looked clear... The same user appeared to have added portions from each source during February 2009. Thanks for pointing that out.--NortyNort (Holla) 10:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your help with the copyright cleanup at Business broker! It is very much appreciated. — Mr. Stradivarius ^♫ 16:54, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

You're welcome, MRG did most of it. That was a tricky one.--NortyNort (Holla) 21:38, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Kölnbrein Dam

Materialscientist (talk) 06:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Lucy's Crabbie Cabbie

Hi, re Lucy's Crabbie Cabbie from Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations/2011-06-11, which revisions need to be deleted? I can't work it out from the history. January (talk) 15:06, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

I put the wrong template on that one, it's a false positive. The bot picked up on a few insignificant terms. My apologies.--NortyNort (Holla) 15:10, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Re: Granada Theater

Thanks for looking into this. I'm not extremely new to Wikipedia (been around here and there for 4-5 years), and am somewhat offended by your insinuations ("This leads into my next question, are you User:Gavinmulloy77 and/or User:Granada Theater? I ask because Gavinmulloy77 made the article and you made the temp while Granada Theater edited the article as well.") I was just trying to help out with the cleanup of the page. I noticed as well that User:Granada Theater edited the page as well, and their work was the issue of the copyright dispute. Is it not obvious enough that they are the owner of the disputed copyright material (taken from granadatheater.com)? — Preceding unsigned comment added byLjplum12 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, I didn't mean to offended you. I was just trying to connect the dots. I saw your account was old but had less than 50 edits. I figured I'd ask to clear things up, nothing against you. I have never seen a user other than the original creator attempt to make a temp so that is good on your part. Both other editors know how to licence the text for Wikipedia.--NortyNort (Holla) 21:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Seddon Mayfly Article Shortened Into Something Like A Stub!

What did you think you were doing when you took 2 entire sections out of one of my articles, Seddon Mayfly! You think that's funny!? Well no, it's certainly not, especially to the article's creator. I AM the creator of the article Seddon Mayfly! It takes quite a long time to make articles, especially ones that aren't stubs. It takes a couple hours for me to make these articles! If only I knew an administrator...WilliamBrain (talk) 15:38, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, I also happen to know how to revert things as well. So here's my reason for reverting: I had a great source: a book named "The World's Worst Aircraft".WilliamBrain (talk) 15:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey William, I had to remove them for copyright reasons. Those sections were close-paraphrasedwith the text from http://www.aviastar.org/air/england/seddon_mayfly.php. I don't see a clear copyright on that website but it must be assumed. You can most certainly rewrite the article, just use your own words. If you have any questions, let me know.--NortyNort (Holla) 21:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia insult is not wanted

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaADQTeZRCY HowardCoward (talk) 23:25, 23 June 2011 (UTC)