User talk:Punditofnone
Welcome!
[edit]Hello, Punditofnone, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your recent edits to the page Don't Stop Believin' did not conform to Wikipedia's verifiability policy, and may have been removed. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations verified in reliable, reputable print or online sources or in other reliable media. Always provide a reliable source for quotations and for any material that is likely to be challenged, or it may be removed. Wikipedia also has a related policy against including original research in articles.
If you are stuck and looking for help, please see the guide for citing sources or come to The Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have.
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! Panian513 23:52, 7 May 2024 (UTC)
Copyright violation
[edit]
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions to the Triloknath Pandit article, but for legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted.
You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text—which means allowing other people to modify it—then you must include on the external site this statement (or something similar): "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later, and under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License".
You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question at the Teahouse. You can also leave a message on my talk page. --Yamla (talk) 18:12, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.
Punditofnone (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I acknowledge that I inadvertently and without detail to attention added a sentence to the Triloknath Pandit article which in parts may have been the exact as it was mentioned in the referred source NY Times[1]. I acknowledge this was ethically and legally wrong and against the very spirit of rightful and open dissemination of knowledge. I guarantee full assurance from my end that this mistake, the lack of attention to detail will never happen again and I humbly request the chance to get my editorial privileges back. I have the utmost request for Copyright laws having professionally worked close to the domain and I deeply regret having inadvertently made this mistake. Wikipedia is sacred to me and I will be extremely disappointed if I won't have the chance to be an active part of the community again. It's only recently that I finally found the strength to transition from a voracious Wikipedia consumer to a contributor and I'd love to have the chance again to contribute to this community in an ethical, legal, and rightful manner. Many thanks for considering my request and for taking the time. Sincerely, PunditofnonePunditofnone (talk) 06:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Duplicate request. Only one open request is needed at a time. 331dot (talk) 08:57, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
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.
In order to lift the block, we need to be certain that you understand how copyright works on Wikipedia. To allow the reviewing administrator to assess your understanding, please respond to the following questions in your next unblock appeal, explaining in your own words:
- What is copyright?
- How is Wikipedia licenced?
- Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?
- Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?
- How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?
Your answers will enable us to establish whether or not you should be unblocked. --Yamla (talk) 11:45, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Punditofnone (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
As requested please find below the answer to your questions. I hope these answers demonstrate my understanding of how Wikipedia's copyright regulation and how I will ensure going ahead that no copyright violation will ever happen again on my behalf
Q1. What is copyright?
A1: Copyright, at its core, is basically a legal mechanism designed to protect the original creations of people, granting them exclusive rights over their created work. This basically includes control over reproduction, distribution, display, and creating derivatives of a given work. It's about protecting how ideas are expressed, not the ideas themselves, ensuring creators can benefit from their creations and control their usage. It's a fundamental principle that respects intellectual property, encouraging innovation and creativity by providing these protections, and also guaranteeing that creators are not robbed of their due credit. Copyright isn't just about protecting someone's work, it's about respecting the blood, sweat, and tears poured into bringing something unique into the world.
Q2. How is Wikipedia licensed?
A2: Based on my recent research and deep dive into the intricacies of licensing, Wikipedia operates under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 Unported License (CC BY-SA 4.0) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). Basically, most of Wikipedia's text and images are co-licensed under both CC BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL, though there are cases where certain content is solely available under CC BY-SA and other CC BY-SA-compatible licenses. One can usually find this specified in the page footer, history, or discussion page. To put it simply, this means anyone can share, remix, tweak, and build upon Wikipedia's work, provided they give appropriate credit and license their new creations under the same terms. This licensing strategy aligns perfectly with Wikipedia's mission to ensure free and open access to information, fostering a global community of creators and consumers who can collaboratively build and expand upon each other’s contributions. It's a framework that supports both the spirit of knowledge sharing and the legalities of content creation, ensuring everyone can benefit from the vast wealth of information available on the platform, thereby fostering a collaborative and inclusive global community of creators and consumers.
Q3. Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?
A3: Wikipedia, as an organization, thrives on the idea of free and open knowledge—content that any human anywhere in the world can use, modify, and share without fear of legal retribution. Allowing copyrighted material would be like inviting a wolf into a sheep's den. Using copyrighted material without permission infringes on creators' rights and contradicts Wikipedia's principles. Wiki requires all contributions to be original, public domain, or under a compatible freely available license to ensure content can be freely used, modified, and shared. Allowing copyrighted material would pose legal risks and undermine the integrity of Wikipedia's open and free-content based model.
Q4. Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?
A4: Wikipedia allows use of copyrighted content under specific conditions, like when the content is in the public domain or released under a license compatible with Wikipedia’s own (like certain Creative Commons licenses like Wikipedia’s CC BY-SA 3.0 license) or under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). Noteworthy to mention that such content must be properly attributed. Additionally, under the "fair use" doctrine, short excerpts of copyrighted works can be used for purposes like critique or education, but this is a nuanced area requiring careful consideration to stay within legal and community guidelines, especially to ensure that such use will never harm the market value of the given original work at all.
Q5. How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?
A5: To avoid violating Wikipedia's copyright policy in the future, I'll be extremely diligent in ensuring that any content I contribute is either my original work or properly licensed. When using information from external sources, I'll make sure to rephrase it in my own words, rather than copying sentences directly, as per Wikipedia's guidelines. This is particularly important because, for legal reasons, Wikipedia can't accept copyrighted text or images from other websites or printed material. If I do want to include specific information, I'll paraphrase it thoroughly to avoid any direct replication, use my own words rather than the exact or extremely similar words from the original content Additionally, if I ever wish to contribute text from an external website that I may happen to own (which are very few currently), I'll include a statement on that particular site (again if any) explicitly allowing the usage of its content under the GNU Free Documentation License. This statement might read, "I, [My Legal Name], am the author of this article, [Article Name], and I release its content/ allow its usage, under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License." By doing this, I’ll ensure that Wikipedia can freely use and modify the content, aligning with the platform's open knowledge principle. I'll also continuously educate myself on Wikipedia's copyright and licensing resources and stay upto date about best practices to make legal, ethical and rightful contributions. This approach will help me contribute in a way that respects both Wikipedia's policies and the rights of original content creators.
Sincerely, Punditofnone
Decline reason:
Since you haven't responded to Rosguill's question I'm assuming you did use AI. Please rewrite in your own words - you're trying to convince us you understand, not that the AI understands. * Pppery * it has begun... 17:33, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
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.
- Can you address whether you used AI software to write the above responses? signed, Rosguill talk 18:21, 21 October 2024 (UTC)