User talk:Simple1Simon2

Copyright problem: Draft:Alan Pemberton

Hello Simple1Simon2! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Draft:Alan Pemberton, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/alan-pemberton, 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 4.0 License (CC BY-SA 4.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Draft talk:Alan Pemberton and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-enwikimedia.org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Draft:Alan Pemberton, 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 4.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Draft talk:Alan Pemberton. 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 4.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Draft talk:Alan Pemberton 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 Draft talk:Alan Pemberton 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) 20:21, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - I was aware of the copyright issues you have raised and was dealing or have already dealt with them. The article I am drafting is to be based on several existing articles. They are either on https://everipedia.org and on https://theburlingtonfiles.org/.

Everipedia is an encyclopedic website similar to Wikipedia and material on Everipedia is all covered by a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license. This means that I am free to share and adapt the material as long as I provide appropriate credit, indicate if changes were made, and distribute my contributions under the same license as the original. The article on Everipedia that I could be said to be copying from is as you say https://everipedia.org/wiki/lang_en/alan-pemberton but as Everipedia (now IQ.wiki) has the same license as Wikipedia I do not believe copyright is an issue regarding that article. Everipedia has been replaced by https://iq.wiki/ which describes itself as The World's Largest Blockchain & Crypto Encyclopedia. On their terms page at https://iq.wiki/terms they state at the bottom of the page: "IQ.wiki's Content: IQ.wiki's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.". I therefore submit that I need do nothing regarding purported copyright issues relating to Everipedia. Kindly confirm that you agree with that and if not please let me know what you want me to do. I will be clarifying all this in a note to be attached to the beginning of the article.

in fact I was not copying from that article although it is very similar to one of two articles on TheBurlingtonFiles website I was using to copy some material from: https://theburlingtonfiles.org/news_2022.10.31.php and https://theburlingtonfiles.org/news_2020.01.07.php.

I have permission to do so from TheBurlingtonFiles.org and they will confirm that in two ways. They will email you at permissions-en@wikimedia.org to confirm it and, knowing I may publish more extracts from their articles on Wikipedia relating to Alan Pemberton, FaireSansDire, British Intelligence, the CIA etc they have kindly agreed to post the following notice on this particularly relevant page of their website: https://theburlingtonfiles.org/index3f7b.php

The notice will read: "TheBurlingtonFiles.org hereby grants irrevocable permission to the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc to copy and/or publish any material published on this website (including material relating to FaireSansDire). In so doing, the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc may at its sole discretion amend or revise that material. It is requested that where appropriate the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc acknowledges TheBurlingtonFiles.org as the source of such material."

I therefore submit that I need do nothing regarding purported copyright issues relating to TheBurlingtonFiles once you have received the email and they have posted the notice referred to above. Kindly confirm that you agree with that and if not please let me know what you want me to do. I will be clarifying all this in a note to be attached to the beginning of the article. Best wishes - Simple1Simon2 Simple1Simon2 (talk) 05:51, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - I have just received a copy of the email sent to you by Mr Fairclough as referred to above. He owns TheBurlingtonFiles.org. It read:

Dear Sir/Madam

I John William Percy Fairclough own the https://theburlingtonfiles.org/ website and the Copyright thereto as noted on the footers to most pages on that website and in its “Legal Stuff” on https://theburlingtonfiles.org/#/legal-stuff.

I understand that Simple1Simon2 at REDACTED is currently drafting an article for publication on Wikipedia about Alan Pemberton and that it is based on two articles already published on my website at the following pages:

Pemberton’s People … https://theburlingtonfiles.org/news_2022.10.31.php
Alan Pemberton ... https://theburlingtonfiles.org/news_2020.01.07.php

I confirm that I have waived all my Copyrights relating to these two articles so far as the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc is concerned and that the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc may copy and/or publish any material from those articles and may at its sole discretion amend or revise that material.

I also confirm that in the ensuing 72 hours the following notice will have been posted on this page https://theburlingtonfiles.org/index3f7b.php of my website:

"TheBurlingtonFiles.org hereby grants irrevocable permission to the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc to copy and/or publish any material published on this website (including material relating to FaireSansDire). In so doing, the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc may at its sole discretion amend or revise that material. It is requested that where appropriate the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc acknowledges TheBurlingtonFiles.org as the source of such material."

Kindly acknowledge receipt of this email. If you require further action by me please explain what more I need to do.

Yours truly

JWP Fairclough

REDACTED

International Calls By Arrangement Via WhatsApp Simple1Simon2 (talk) 06:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - As promised TheBurlingtonFiles.org have now posted the following notice on their website: https://theburlingtonfiles.org/index3f7b.php

"TheBurlingtonFiles.org hereby grants irrevocable permission to the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc to copy and/or publish any material published on this website (including material relating to FaireSansDire). In so doing, the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc may at its sole discretion amend or revise that material. It is requested that where appropriate the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc acknowledges TheBurlingtonFiles.org as the source of such material."

Please confirm all is OK to proceed with my article which has a long way to go before it is ready for your review. Best wishes - Simple1Simon2 Simple1Simon2 (talk) 08:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Burlington notice is not a compatible license, because it releases the material solely for use on Wikipedia. Our license allows re-use by anybody, and allows re-users to amend the material. Can you please tell me which specific parts of the draft were copied from there?

You are correct that Everipedia is compatibly licensed. That's okay to copy, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. It's also required under the terms of the license. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 12:32, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - Thank you for your reply. I have already spent many hours working on this article and have many more hours to go so I cannot yet state categorically which specific parts of the draft were or are to be copied from Everipedia. Nevertheless, I have three questions I hope you can answer.

You have added a note to (what is left of) the text saying "This article incorporates text available under the CC BY 4.0 license." Do you want me to add anything more to that in respect of any more of the contents of the Everipedia article I copy and incorporate into my article? For example, do I have to repeat the note you added for each piece of text from the Everipedia article copied and incorporated in my Wikipedia article or will it suffice as it is as a blanket all encompassing note at the beginning of the article?
To avoid further complications, can you please confirm that from Wikipedia's perspective it would be acceptable if TheBurlingtonFiles.org (or indeed any other website I copy from) incorporated a notice saying "This article (URL reference) is openly licensed via CC BY 4.0." at the beginning (and/or end) of each article on the relevant websites, extracts from which I will be copying into articles I post on Wikipedia?
Alternatively, from Wikipedia's perspective would it also be acceptable if TheBurlingtonFiles.org (or indeed any other website I copy from) incorporated a blanket all encompassing notice saying: "TheBurlingtonFiles.org is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License."

I look forward to seeing your clarification of these points preferably before proceeding with any more drafting of my initial article. In addition, it might help if you could point me in the direction of some Wikipedia articles that display "best practice" relating to this subject. Best wishes - Simple1Simon2 Simple1Simon2 (talk) 14:08, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I actually need you to tell me which specific content was copied from the Burlington website, not the Everipedia article. The Burlington website is not accessible to our automated tools.
The Everipedia attribution is adequately covered by the statement at the bottom of the article.
The way for the Burlington website to release their content under a compatible license would be to incorporate a statement at the bottom of each webpage they wish to license. Such license would say "Content is released under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License" or similar.
We have plenty of material for you to explore regarding our copyright policy. A good place to start is Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright.

— Diannaa (talk) 20:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - That is most helpful thank you. In future, any material I copy from websites such as Everipedia will be accompanied in my Wikipedia articles by an all embracing reference to their CC By 4.0 License. As for other websites such as TheBurlingtonFiles.org, I will only copy and publish any material from them if I have first persuaded them to add an acceptable Copyright Disclaimer message on the relevant website pages; I will then separately flag each specific extract that has been copied in any of my Wikipedia articles.

The Wikipedia copyright article you referred me to was also very useful and has pre-empted some questions I had about copying images! Hopefully, I can now navigate within the rules and avoid any further unintentional breaches thereof. Many thanks again and best wishes - Simple1Simon2 Simple1Simon2 (talk) 07:03, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to say, neither of these websites would be considered to be a reliable source for Wikipedia's purposes. — Diannaa (talk) 20:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - Understood although in the genre I am researching many of the relevant articles on both those websites have loads of useful "facts". Unfortunately, the "facts" in those articles are generally speaking without proper citations and/or the links to the citations no longer work and/or the articles are out of date! Best wishes - Simple1Simon2 Simple1Simon2 (talk) 07:17, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - When can I continue drafting the article? Will what you removed be replaced so as I can continue editing it? Best wishes - Simple1Simon2 Simple1Simon2 (talk) 20:08, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - I think I have now published the Alan Pemberton article for review now TheBurlingtonFiles.org has made the changes they promised to the two webpages referred to in Citation 1. I understood from you that the identification of material copied from Everipedia (IQ.wiki) was unnecessary and as TheBurlingtonFiles article entitled Alan Pemberton was ad verbatim identical to the earlier IQ.wiki article Alan Pemberton there was no need to identify extracts from that in my Wikipedia article. If i got this wrong then I can easily correct it (as my Word app identifies any similarities with other published material).

Please note that this is my first Wikipedia article (hopefully of many) so there may be unintentional errors. I did find it difficult to prepare such a long piece about espionage because of course those I am writing about dedicated their lives to ensuring that no one had a clue as to what they did! Thus data that is not "notable in the world of Wikipedia" may be crucial in the real world of espionage! So, if you deem any citations/links inappropriate, please edit the text rather than simply delete it all. Any questions please feel free to fire them at me. Best wishes - Simple1Simon2 Simple1Simon2 (talk) 10:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Alan Pemberton (September 3)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe were:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Alan Pemberton and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 13:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Simple1Simon2! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 13:34, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This myopic response is truly amazing but not unexpected. Another example of Wikipedia missing a true espionage saga, inter alia involving World War 2 heroes. Why don't all the Wikipedia toffs such as User:SafariScribe actually help people produce articles on Wikipedia instead of just rejecting articles? It must be obvious this article took a lot of effort to prepare and publish. How unhelpful can anyone get? Simple1Simon2 (talk) 14:43, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]