User talk:Rockers.vn
|
October 2012
[edit]Do you mind explaining why you have a copy of the article Megan Fox on your user page? JamesBWatson (talk) 15:46, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
- Thanks for the barnstar. I am copying the message you put in it to here, to keep discussion of one topic together, which I find less confusing.
- sorry if i violated anything i was just trying to update the page with the typography of one of the megan fox's image which i created myself using photoshop.I was unable to edit ,so i copied .
- i will delete it if you want as you are an admin.
- i'm new at wiki so help me show the right way. Rockers.vn (talk) 16:06, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
- Don't worry. I thought that was probably the reason, but I wanted to be sure. Copying an article to your user space to edit the copy is not against any policies or anything, though sometimes it can cause problems, so in normal circumstances I wouldn't recommend it. If your intention was that eventually the edited copy could be posted back to the article, the problem that, by the time you are ready to post it back, someone else may have edited the article, so you can't post your version without undoing their work. If your intention was to keep the copy as your own preferred version of the article, then you might find objections. Keeping your own preferred version of an article in your userspace is against the user page guidelines, for good reasons. If you just wanted to use the copy of the article to experiment, and help to learn about editing Wikipedia, then that's fine, though it would be better to make it clear that's what you're doing. You can do that by using an edit summary, which I will explain in a minute.
- It's a real nuisance that some articles have to be protected because of a few disruptive editors, causing problems for legitimate editors. When an article is protected and you can't edit it, the best way to deal with the problem is to request that the edit be made for you, by putting on the articles talk page {{edit semi-protected|answered=no}} followed by the edit you want to make, and an explanation why. In this case, I really like your typography art, but I don't think there would really be a justification for including it in the article, as it does not really add anything about Megan Fox, and showing off your artwork is, I'm afraid, not the purpose of Wikipedia.
- When you copy something from a Wikipedia article to somewhere else, you should make it clear that is what you are doing, as technically it is an infringement of the authors' copyright if yo copy their work without attribution. (Don't worry: you are not likely to be sued for breach of copyright. The worst that is reasonably likely to happen is that your copy is deleted, but it is worth doing it properly.) The best way to do this is by an edit summary. If you don't yet know what that means, whenever you edit any Wikipedia page, just under the area where you do the editing there is a box labelled "Edit summary (Briefly describe the changes you have made)". It is best if for every edit you use put a brief explanation of what you are doing in that box. That explanation will then appear in the page's editing history, and other editors will have an idea what you are doing. There are various advantages in providing an edit summary for every edit you make, but in the case I am talking about something like "Copying content from Megan Fox to edit it" would be OK.
- I am giving you a (somewhat belated) welcome message above. It has links to various pages of useful information about editing Wikipedia. Don't try to read and learn all of it before you do any editing, as there is far too much there for that. However, do have a quick look at any pages that seem particularly relevant to what you want to do, and come back to it as and when you need more information.
- Finally, please do contact me on my talk page again if you have any further questions. I will either answer them or try to point you to somewhere else where you can are likely to get a better answer than I could give. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:54, 16 October 2012 (UTC)
This is an automated message from MadmanBot. I have performed a search with the contents of MEGAN FOX, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Megan Fox. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page— you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.
It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. MadmanBot (talk) 08:23, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
- A few points about this:
- The article Megan Fox has, unfortunately, had to be protected because of persistent disruptive editing. Even if you had perfectly good intentions when you created a duplicate of it, doing so amounted to removing the effect of the protection, which would enable the disruptive editing to continue. In fact, it is never acceptable to try to get round the effect of page protection by creating the page under a different title.
- Whether an article is protected or not, making duplicate copies of them is unhelpful, for several reasons. Having several different versions of an article, with different content, is likely to cause confusion, and makes it difficult to ensure that corrections, updates, etc, are applied to all of them. It also makes it harder to prevent individual editors from making edits that are against consensus or Wikipedia policies in their own preferred versions of an article.
- Article titles should not be in unnatural formats, such as all capitals, except in special circumstances, such as trademarks which are always written that way.
- I have already explained that copying content from Wikipedia without attribution is a copyright infringement. I tried to be fairly gentle in my warning about that, because no doubt you did it with good intentions. However, you have now done the same again after the situation had been explained to you. People who persist in infringing copyright after warnings are likely to be blocked from editing.
- As I have already explained, your "typography art" is not suitable for inclusion in the article. You may be very proud of it, and want to publish it, in which case by all means go ahead and do so, but Wikipedia is not the place to do it. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:32, 17 October 2012 (UTC)