Jump to content

User talk:Richiechambers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, Richiechambers, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Richiechambers/sandbox, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! !dave 19:23, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Richiechambers/sandbox

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on User:Richiechambers/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://en.bitcoinwiki.org/wiki/HTMLCOIN. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken 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. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. !dave 19:23, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:HTMLCOIN

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:HTMLCOIN requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from en.bitcoinwiki.org/wiki/HTMLCOIN. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken 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. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Drewmutt (^ᴥ^) talk 00:44, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of HTMLCOIN

[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on HTMLCOIN, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:16, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

February 2018

[edit]
Stop icon
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission. You have been previously warned that this is against policy, but have persisted. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content.
If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  TonyBallioni (talk) 20:19, 19 February 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, I am extremely new to Wikipedia and now find myself blocked indefinitely for copyright violation. I have been trying to write an article entitled HTMLCOIN and it has been deleted three times now because it is a close copy of a page within a wiki project that I also wrote. Here is the page: https://en.m.bitcoinwiki.org/wiki/HTMLCOIN The article is currently buried within a much larger wiki project. What I have been trying to do is write a stand alone wikipedia article about HTMLCOIN that is not buried deep within another project.

The first time I wrote the article to be a stand alone article it was deleted because of copyright violation. I was told by the reviewer who deleted it that there needed to be a creative commons or some other applicable attribute applied to the first article. This was new stuff for me and I appreciated the first admin/reviewers tips and advice about seeking proper copyright approval. I then contacted the people who administer the Wiki project to which the article sits and asked them to get a creative commons license for their site and the page in question. They did that and then I figured I was ready to go. I then posted my article entitled HTMLCOIN again, but once again it was deleted because of copyright infringement. I then contested the speedy deletion telling the reviewer what I just told you and that the original article was also written by me and now has a creative commons licence attached to it. I heard nothing back from that reviewer and my article remained deleted.

I then went onto the Wikipedia Helpdesk and asked about the creative commons license on the first site and if that is enough to allow me to post the second article without a copyright infringement. That was on February 7th at 19:47. Worldbruce responded to me and said that everything sounded reasonable and that I probably should be able to post the second article if the first article has the creative commons license attached to it. He told me to double check with the last admin who deleted the article-- RHaworth. I did not do that, and I apologize for that, but given that he did not respond to my appeal for speedy deletion, I didn't think I was going to have any luck with him. Instead, I posted the article a third time, believing that the next admin/reviewer would indeed see the creative commons license attached to the first article. This ultimately did not happen and my article has been deleted a third time and I have now been told that I have been blocked indefinitely as a result of copyright violation.

Can you please help? If I am infringing copyright, I will make a point of getting the first article deleted, but all my research seems to say that if a creative commons license is posted on the first article then I should be able to post the stand alone HTMLCOIN article that I have been trying to do.

Thanks for your time.Richiechambers (talk) 21:45, 19 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Unfortunately there are two problems with the page. Firstly, while https://en.m.bitcoinwiki.org/wiki/HTMLCOIN is released under a Creative Commons license, it's the wrong one - it's CC BY-SA 4.0, which is not compatible with the CC BY-SA 3.0 license used (and required) by Wikipedia. Now copyright and licensing is a difficult topic, and I'm willing to accept that this was a mistake in good faith (it seems Worldbruce also wasn't aware of the finer points of the various CC licenses). However, the page you copy-pasted was inappropriate for Wikipedia even without the licensing issues, with the references not mentioning Htmlcoin at all, not reliable or not independent. There's no indication that Htmlcoin is notable, and the content you tried to add is rather blatantly promotional. If all you intend to do is write about this cryptocurrency, I don't think unblocking you would improve the encyclopedia. Huon (talk) 23:31, 19 February 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hi, I respectfully ask for Wikipedia admin to change my indefinite unblock status. I was blocked by Tony Ballioni on February 19th. The reason that was stated was "copyright violation." If you read the above unblock appeal you will see that I tried my best to adhere to copyright rules by attempting to have a creative commons license placed on the first article that I had copied from. I also sought help from Wikipedia's help processes and was given information that the last admin to review my case, Huon, said was not quite accurate. The true irony here is that both articles in question were written by me, but I do completely understand and respect that that doesn't matter and that if I am going to quote or copy from one article into a second one, copyright rules have to be adhered to. I thought I had done this with the creative commons licences, but it turns out I had the wrong creative commons license placed on the first article. Once again, I can accept that, and although I have tried, I have not done all copyright procedures properly, but to have an indefinite block placed on my account without prior warning that an indefinite block was going to happen, I don't believe is fair. Wikipedia does state that persistent copyright violators can be blocked from editing. I definitely acknowledge that, but what constitutes a persistent violator? A warning after my second deletion that I was a persistent violator and that one more violation would result in me being indefinitely blocked would have been appreciated and I think would have made this process much more fair and reasonable and easier for me to accept. But, that isn't the main reason for this appeal to Huon's earlier decision to keep me blocked. Huon states that he/she is "willing to accept that this (the copyright confusion) was a mistake in good faith," which I really appreciate because Huon is exactly right---it all was a mistake in good faith on my part and I think that my efforts to attain a creative commons license and seeking help from Wikipedia shows that I never intended to consciously abuse copyright rules. But Huon keeps me indefinitely blocked because he/she says that the content I was writing was not independent and blatantly promotional (G11). But, I was blocked by Tony Ballioni because of copyright violation (G12). I was not blocked because of a G11 violation. In fact, in the first two reviews of my article, a G11 violation was not even mentioned. Tony Ballioni was the first to mention G11, but he did not block me for that because in the opinions of the first two reviewers, I had not committed a G11 violation, so he was, I assume, realizing the subjectivity of blocking me because of a G11 violation. So, that means that 4 wikipedia admin have dealt with this article. They are: the first two reviewers of my article who cited only copyright violation, Tony Ballioni who blocked me for copyright violation and also cited a G11 violation, and Huon, who said that he/she was willing to accept the copyright confusion on good faith but not the G11 violation. Of those four, two, Tony Ballioni and HUON cited a G11 violation. That is 50% of the reviewers of my article. If all four reviewers had cited a G11 violation, I would be more than willing to accept the indefinite block on my account because of a G11 violation, but only 50% of them did. So, I am currently being told that my indefinite block is being maintained because of a G11 violation that only 2 out of 4 reviewers of my article cited. I don't think that that is fair and respectfully request that my indefinite block be removed. Also, I would like to say that I have in no way set out to consciously offend anyone or disrespect the Wikipedia process. I am just simply a guy who set out to write an article and has learned some very valuable lessons regarding copyright and other publication issues along the way. With the knowledge I have gained through this process, I will be approaching any future Wikipedia writing and editing with full respect for the entire process. I would like to be allowed that opportunity by having my indefinite block lifted. Thank you for your time and attention. Richiechambers (talk) 18:35, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I have no doubt at all that, as you said, you had no intention "to consciously offend anyone or disrespect the Wikipedia process", and you no doubt came here in perfectly good faith. I can also fully understand the sense of frustration that you no doubt feel, having taken the trouble to try to deal with the issue you were told about, only to find that another issue takes its place. However, whether you are unblocked depends not on whether you have honourable intentions, but on whether it seems that unblocking you will benefit the project or not. Your only editing has been posting content clearly aimed at using Wikipedia to publicise or advertise something, which is contrary to Wikipedia policy. Whether editors who reviewed and rejected your draft chose to mention promotional editing in their rejection reason is not the issue: the issue is whether your writing was promotional, and it clearly was. What is more, nothing you have said gives any indication that you expect to edit differently in the future, so that unblocking you would very probably simply result in your continuing the same kind of editing again. Wikipedia is not a free tool for companies to use to get publicity for their products. (On another issue Wikipedia is not a court of law, and an administrator reviewing as unblock request is required to consider whether unblocking the account would on balance be to the benefit of the project, taking into account all relevant facts'. It is not like a court of appeal, which considers only the exact original indictment. If you prefer you can regard the original block for copyright reasons to have been replaced by a new one because the evidence suggests that you are interested only in using Wikipedia to publicise a product sold by your company.) The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 17:19, 22 February 2018 (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.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Richiechambers&oldid=827078650"