User talk:Diannaa/Archive 70

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 65

←

Archive 68

→

Frank W. Caldwell

Hi Diannaa, a new article, Frank W. Caldwell, appears to draw primarily from this source. While some sentences have been rewritten and shuffled, many are lifted whole from the source. The article needs a lot of work to properly wikify it, but I don't want to work on it until the copyvio issues have been addressed. I'm also not a natural summarizer/rewriter, or I'd do it myself. The article also doesn't have enough independent sources to verify notability. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 02:50, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 03:15, 27 April 2020 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 03:15, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 13:55, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Dan Smith00

A tag has been placed on your user page, User talk:Dan Smith00, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 15:30, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello IdreamofJeanie. We don't normally delete user talk pages. I have removed the advert/copyvio and done some revision deletion and removed talk page access. — Diannaa (talk) 15:37, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

/* ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct */

Hi Diannaa,

I hope you are doing well. I attempted to edit a section of the Association for Computing Machinery; ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility. Yes, there were some copyright infringements there, I apologize for that. I want to re-edit it now, but I don't see that particular section anymore. What happened?

--Emmanuelidun (talk) 15:54, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more.— Diannaa (talk) 15:55, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

7-Keto-DHEA

Hello,

I just found that you restricted the visibiliy of almost all entries of the edit history on that article (until back to 2012 when the article was created), practically turning it into a stub. You stated you did this for copyright purposes. I think this is not justified; it would be completey new to me that such violations would require per se access restriction to all old article versions containing it without any explaination or the possibility given that the community works it over; this is also not in the community guidelines AFAIK. Moreover, thereby you have cancelled access to all disputed sources in the article so one cannot check and compare if there has been new developments and thus update the article. This seems like some overkill for some copyright issues to me, especially as you have cancelled all 179 revisions flat. I have been working on WP for over 10 years and never encountered such thing before, I think this is way overdone. Furthermore, I do not think RD1 does apply to hiding content per se; this might be the last straw but WP:Copyright problems does have precedence. But feel free to correct me if I am wrong...

Therefore I ask you to remove the restrictions to that articles' history please. Please allow us users to edit such things out instead of blocking content as the RevisionDelete policy states. Thank you.

Many greetings -- 2003:CB:2F00:7C22:A17D:2BCC:21A1:6249 (talk) 00:07, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

There already is some discussion on the talk page, as the content was initially removed by other editors for reasons other than copyright. When you restored it, a bot report was triggered, and that's when I discovered the material had been copied from this brochure published in 2005. Company brochures are not considered to be reliable sources for our medical articles, so we can't use it, regardless of the copyright status of the brochure. We can't host copyright content, not even temporarily for editing. So for these reasons there's no point undoing the revision deletion to allow the content to be edited or re-added in a modified form. The paragraph I removed was information about a 1998 study that appears on page 4 of the brochure. — Diannaa (talk) 12:02, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft talk:Srila Bhaktivedanta Narayana Gosvami Maharaja

Hi Diannaa,

I hope you are doing well and staying healthy during this unusual time.

You recently reviewed an article I wrote called "Srila_Bhaktivedanta_Narayana_Gosvami_Maharaja" and available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Srila_Bhaktivedanta_Narayana_Gosvami_Maharaja. You flagged the article for potential copyright violation, and I'm responding here. Please forgive me if this is not the right place to adress this issue and I should have emailed you instead. This is my first time creating an article for Wikipedia, and thus first time responding to a request of this sort, so I hope I've gotten this part right.

The owner of the website which I am alleged to have copied has written to permissions-en@wikimedia.org and indicated that he permits use of the content from his webiste under CC-BY-SA and the GFDL. The ticket number he received back is 2020042710003651.

I apologize for not realizing the rules of Wikipedia. I see content on here all the time that is in various other places on the Internet and assumed that content in the public domain was fine to reuse. When you remove the notice on my proposed article and I am able to edit once again, I would be happy to rewrite to better meet the expectations of Wikipedia for high-quality articles and find a different reference for the content.

Please let me know if there is anything else I need to do to resolve the copyright issue.

Warm wishes, KD

Hello, the OTRS ticket only covers one of the two webpages that I listed on my report.— Diannaa (talk) 11:30, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello again, Diannaa. I have tried to reach the owner of that web page, but unfortunately I have not been able to reach the second one. Would you be amenable to allowing me to simply rewrite the article and cite different sources? Thank you for your consideration! Best, KD

There's instructions on your talk page as to how to proceed if you wish to re-write the material.— Diannaa (talk) 22:31, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Diannaa. I will proceed according to your instructions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.167.91.70 (talk) 23:24, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

English Patriot Man again?

Could you look at this: [1]? Seems to be one of the never ending incarnations of EPM. --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:20, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

It's hard to say with only one edit, without any of his usual tells. Please let me know what develops.— Diannaa (talk) 11:27, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Simple solution? [2]. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

All the marks of EPM, look in the text he entered: In the Third Reich lived a million Poles recognized as Aryans: In March 1939, Karl Frank defined a "German national" as: Whoever professes himself to be a member of the German nation is a member of the German nation, provided that this profession is confirmed by certain facts, such as language, upbringing, culture, etc. Persons of alien blood, particularly Jews, are never Germans. . . . Because professing to be a member of the German nation is of vital significance, even someone who is partly or completely of another race—Czech, Slovak, Ukrainian, Hungarian, or Polish, for example—can be considered a German. Any more precise elaboration of the term "German national" is not possible given current relationships.''

This is a standard EPM texts about Poles being Aryan and the quote he frequently used. Now another sock reverted the content with the standard text about "historical truth" Are you afraid of historical truth? What's wrong here?, again this is the tirade EPM engaged constantly in using this phrase: [3] --MyMoloboaccount (talk) 11:38, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

@MyMoloboaccount: Btw, I also made a request at AE: [4]. I am not sure how to handle the entire warning and sanctions stuff, I always find it confusing. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:46, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Well first you said Fireslow and now you want me to look at a different guy. Maybe they are both socks. And now I am getting an edit conflict on my own talk page when I try to respond. — Diannaa (talk) 11:48, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

EPM created a lot of accounts where the username contains the letter J and some numbers. The Janj9088 account was created in April 2017 but has no edits until nearly a year later (sleeper?). On the other hand EPM never did to my knowledge create any new articles, and Janj9088 has written ten. I can believe that Janj9088 and Fireslow are the same person, but I'm not prepared to say they are EPM. If you with to pursue this further please file a report at SPI and present your evidence there. I will be doing my copyvio work for the next many hours as there's 46 reports left from yesterday that need to be assessed. Thanks.— Diannaa (talk) 12:21, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

I will try to pursue this on SPI, there is a striking resemblance in naming, Janj9088, and former EPM accounts Hashi0707 and Windows66, note in all cases this is a play with the number 88.--MyMoloboaccount (talk) 12:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

I saw that too, but it's not enough for me to act upon. Perhaps you can get a check-user to help - everybody knows where he lives. — Diannaa (talk) 12:39, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Reply to Copyright Query by You

Ok I will see to it.But please allow me to make edits in my own words because I am adding legitimate information.

Henry Hazlitt bibliography

Hi Diannaa--this article is already crazy over the top, but I find links like this one in there--a book from 1970. That can't be right, can it? Thanks, Drmies (talk) 04:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

I have removed many of the external links, as they appear to point to copyright-violating material.— Diannaa (talk) 13:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Drmies (talk) 15:47, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Ernest Steven Monteiro

Hi,

I have just removed the copywrite violation portion from the article. Can you help to reviewed if it is acceptable? If yes, please remove the copyvio template. If not, please advise how can I proceed further. Thanks. Flipchip73 (talk) 10:20, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Flipchip73 and thanks for your work so far. There's still a ways to go as you can see by using this tool. — Diannaa (talk) 13:06, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, thank you for the tool. Any idea how low of a percentage I have remove to consider acceptable? Some of the wordings are from other listed references (old newspaper cuttings) are necessary but are listed as copyvio, which is ridiculous. Hopefully the admin that checks the changes would look into the other listed references (old newspaper cuttings). Kindly advice if possible. Flipchip73 (talk) 01:43, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I have reduced the percentage to 15.3%. Would that be sufficient as this would be the minimum and reducing further will cause the article to be unreadable? If yes, kindly help to remove the copyvio tag and I have also copied the updated article to the mainspace. Flipchip73 (talk) 02:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

It's not so much the percentage but you should scan the content and look for overlapping content that is not job titles, the names of schools, or the like. Article is now okay. Thank you, — Diannaa (talk) 11:50, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

You are deleting a fact based content,Please read the website you are quoting for violation

You are deleting a fact based content,Please read the website you are quoting for violation.I have not even visited ,neither quoted that website ever.Please read my content and content on that site.It is different.I just saw that it contains tabs like familiarity,sustenance and implementation whereas my prose edit contains Orientation,Review Workshop and Valediction .Because I am myself a fellow I know about the structure and therefore I wrote about it as it is a fact based information so it is bound to remain constant everywhere.Please don't delete information without reading and giving random websites for copyright violation.You can read the website you have quoted in edit summary for copyright violation and you will not find details about Review Workshops or Valediction that I have quoted in my prose.So how is there a copyright violation.Please restore the deleted edit.It is a fact based information and not copied from the website you quoted.

SBI Youth for India. The material has previously been published online, so we can't accept it on Wikipedia, regardless of where you copied it from or even if you claim by some chance that your original content is identical to material already published online. In fact it is the same material I have repeatedly removed for violating our copyright policy since the 18th of April. So no.— Diannaa (talk) 22:36, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

2UE/3DB

Dear Diannaa,

Your notes on my talk page were appreciated. Your last comment was completely correct; I did supply the original comments on the 3DB page (and similar comments on the Lux Radio Theatre page. Of course, a check of the History page for both 3DB and LRT will show this.

With thanks, Albert Isaacs (talk) 17:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I did not have time to do a thorough check of the source web page or I would have seen that. Please excuse the unnecessary notice.— Diannaa (talk) 22:38, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Why the revert?

Hi Diannaa, what's the reason behind your reversion https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Informationdude420&oldid=953950944?, just curious. xinbenlv ^{Talk, Remember to "ping" me} 23:43, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

It was trolling by a vandalism-only account. It's no Diff of User talk:I dream of horses, but still.— Diannaa (talk) 00:48, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

You have an email from Andrew M Nelson - File permission problem with File:SEMI President and CEO Ajit Manocha 2020 Photo.jpg[edit]

Hi Diannaa,

Please see my email response to licensing issues you raised about a photo I wanted to update.

Thank you, Mark (Alias Andrew M Nelson) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Andrew M Nelson (talk • contribs) 00:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 01:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 01:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia and Copyrights issues

Dear Diannaa, thanks for the email. I understand the importance of the issue, but I have a question for the future: publishers, in general, allow to make public pre-print researches or articles, when the DOI is mentioned in the context of the script. When I prepare a Wikipedia page, using as reference (my) pre-printed articles (also mentioned in the notes), is it not sufficient mentioning the DOI + author? In case of pre-printed material, should I write additional remarks or references in the notes? Thanks for the collaboration.

Oraziostudies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oraziostudies (talk • contribs) 14:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

It's not okay to add copyright material to Wikipedia, even pre-prints, and even if you are the author. Making something publicly available is not the same thing as releasing it into the public domain or releasing it under a Creative Commons license. If you are the copyright holder and wish to release this material under a compatible license, please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent.— Diannaa (talk) 18:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Kokoni

Hello Adelexylem. I have now undone the revision deletion and instead have listed the article at WP:CP. This process will give you a minimum of one week to clean up your additions so that they comply with Wikipedia's copyright policy. Sorry but I don't have time to clean it myself; that's why I removed it all, perhaps too heavy handedly I admit. I've placed some instructions as to how to proceed on your talk page .— Diannaa (talk) 11:38, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you and I'm sorry I was acting like an ass. I hope you understand that I was very saddened/frustrated to see it all revised. That does not excuse my words. I'm sorry, please do not take it personally. I was hasty and heavy-handed with my frustration as well. How do I fix the page if it has the huge Copyright Problems thing on it now? I'm really discouraged.

Take a copy of an old version of the article and work on it in the designated temporary page.— Diannaa (talk) 11:59, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Not a copyright violation

I appreciate you keeping a vigilant eye on things but I think this is a mistake. This is my sentence: {As a result, in his decretal of 1199, Vergentis in senium, Innocent III (1198–1216), took the crucial step of combining heresy with the Roman-law doctrine of lèse-majesté, thereby accusing heretics of treason against God.<ref name="Monter"/>}. There are 6 mentions of "decretal" in the article.

{In a decretal letter, Licet Heli, of Dec. 10, 1199, however, innocent iii (1198–1216) addressed the problems of both clerical misbehavior and prelatal negligence in imposing discipline on criminous clerks, "against whom, so that notorious excesses shall cease, there are three kinds of procedure possible: accusation, denunciation, and inquisition about them."}
{In 1210 Innocent instructed petrus beneventanus to make a selection of the decretal letters of the first 12 years of his pontificate, the Compilatio Tertia, which was to be sent to the masters and students of the law school at bologna and taught as canon law for all of Christendom.}
{In 1184 Pope lucius iii (1181–1185) issued the decretal letter Ad abolendam, which condemned the "insolence" of heretics and "their attempts to promote falsehood." }
{In 1199 Innocent III issued the decretal Vergentis in senium, which incorporated much of Ad abolendam, but also identified heresy with the doctrine of treason in Roman law.}
{In the decretal Cum ex officii nostri of 1207, Innocent stated that convicted heretics should be turned over to secular authority for punishment, that their property should be confiscated and sold, their houses should be levelled to the ground, and that even sympathizers of heretics should be fined one-fourth of their property.}
{In 1252 Pope innocent iv (1243–1254) issued the decretal Ad extirpanda, which classified heretics as thieves of spiritual things and murderers of the soul, and he authorized secular courts in Italy to employ judicial torture in order to secure confessions in heresy trials, just as they already could in other criminal cases.}

I don't understand how my sentence could be considered a copyright violation since it is a paraphrase that is properly referenced. Perhaps there is some other problem with it? Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

History of Christian thought on persecution and tolerance. There were two different bot reports: here; here. Click on the iThenticate links to view what the bot found. Here is what I found using Earwig's tool. There's four paragraphs that were the same or nearly the same. Checking the article further I found material copied from https://www.nku.edu/content/dam/hisgeo/docs/archives/Vol21_2005-2006perspectives.pdf#page=47 (Earwig report) and https://www.encyclopedia.com/environment/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/inquisition-inquisition-old-world (Earwig report), so I removed the overlapping material from those websites as well.— Diannaa (talk) 13:09, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay I finally found what you were referring to. I regularly just move material to my sandbox where I work on it and then post it to the article, and I see that I missed this and just moved it without realizing I had failed to rewrite it. I wasn't as careful as I should have been. Damn! I am sorry! I have been off Wikipedia for almost two years and have only been back a week and I could tell immediately that I was out of practice and rusty, but I didn't think it was this bad. This is a kick in the pants! So I am going to rewrite, and quote, the stuff that was removed if that's okay, and is the sentence you referenced first okay after all? That one has to reuse some of those phrases, like the title of the papal bull, but do they need to be in quotes? I haven't been doing that. I was still a newbie when I left and didn't know all the rules then and have forgotten most of them by now. But copying I get! I swear it was an accident of working late at night with half a brain and it will never happen again. This is humiliating honestly. Jenhawk777 (talk) 16:33, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Dianna what the heck?!? You cleared my sandbox? I copied the stuff there so I could work on it, am I not allowed to fix it? How else can I fix it? Most of what you removed has nothing to do with this. Most of it was my own work from Quora that I hadn't decided on yet. Why did you do that? Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry Jenhawk777, but copyright content is not permitted anywhere on Wikipedia, not even in sandboxes or drafts. — Diannaa (talk) 17:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I thought my sandbox was where I was supposed to do that reworking. That's what I was told--at least that's what I understood. I can see that copying stuff to my sandbox is what led to failing to catch that I hadn't rewritten it however. If I hadn't just copied it there, none of this would have happened, so I can see my method is what's flawed. I will change my approach. Am I allowed to replace the removed texts if I fix them? Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Everything you add to Wikipedia needs to be written in your own words and needs proper sources. That's how we create the encyclopedia— Diannaa (talk) 17:28, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes I know that, and assuming I do that, can I then replace those paragraphs without being warned I am edit warring? Is it okay to replace that first sentence since it was not a duplicate after all, or does it need more? Jenhawk777 (talk) 17:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

If you have a good source and editors don't express any objections there's no reason why you can't add properly sourced content that is in compliance with ourt copyright policy. But I can't guarantee nobody will warn you for edit warring. I am not going to go over each sentence with you - I don't have time. — Diannaa (talk) 18:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay then I will figure it out on my own. I did learn something from this so thank you for that. Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

←

→

Thanks for the review and edits

Hi Diannaa, thank you for review the content on this article about 'Drones in wildfire management'. I will rewrite the copyrighted content and add it back to the article with proper sourcing, if that's okay. NawJee (talk) 17:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

There's nothing wrong with the sourcing - the problem is that you copied from your sources, in violation of our copyright policy.— Diannaa (talk) 18:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

I understand that. You posted an extensive guide to it on my talk page. I'll fix it, no worries. NawJee (talk) 23:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
Message added 18:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 18:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much. - BilCat (talk) 18:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

2007 Seville City Council election

Hi, Diaanna. The content was actually moved from my sandbox, you can check it by yourself as the work is still laying there. Does that require atribution? Cheers, Sevi95 (talk) 19:16, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Not from your own sandbox. But the same wording does appear in a number of Wikipedia articles, including Opinion polling for the 2019 Spanish local elections— Diannaa (talk) 19:28, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

File:Coxcommunications.svg - Undo file deletion

~~Can you undo your deletion of File:Coxcommunications.svg, the move to the Commons was rejected, and the Commons copy was just deleted. Thanks.~~--The Navigators (talk) 21:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry cancel that request. I was looking at the wrong file, confused it for the other logo file. Disregard entirely.--The Navigators (talk) 21:43, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Understood and thanks!

Hey, thanks for reminding me of the attribution requirement for copying within Wikipedia! I was originally gonna modify some bits on that small text I copied from Paracyclotosaurus, but I probably forgot to, so that's possibly why it appeared the same Mastodonsauridae (the page in which I pasted the text). Even though saying that, I totally forgot about the attribution requirement that you need! Anyways, thanks again for reminding me of that! JurassicClassic767 (talk) 23:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your instructions re:Polo

Hi Dianaa,

Thanks for your instructions regarding the polo article. I made small modifications (without any extensive copying) to reflect what the already referenced documents are saying regarding this topic. Nothing is copied and pasted now, and the tone of the text has remained the same although it is accurately reflecting the references without verbatim copying. Hope this clarifies my changes.

Regards,

Ḵoršid (talk) 19:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

question

hi, thanx for unblocking me so I can continue contributing to Wikipedia! I have a question, can I use material from here: https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/aa7b09 or its forbidden? and how about this? https://www.nature.com/articles/s41567-018-0343-1?draft=collection how can I know if the material is under a compatible Creative Commons Licence or not?? pleas guide me! Zvi grossnass (talk) 11:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Look for the copyright information. Do you see a licensing statement on either of these documents? Can see it on this one? Look carefully; it's there. What clues or information can you find on this one? If you don't see a compatible license, that means the document can't be copied. Here is a list of compatible licenses. When copying from compatibly licensed work, you need to provide attribution. That's the "attribution" part of the Creative Commons Attribution licence. You can either use the template {{CC-notice}} or do it manually like I did here. That said, for the most part we write Wikipedia articles in our own words, using sources as a source of information, not as a source of prose. — Diannaa (talk) 12:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

i once used this article and you said its ok. why? i don't see the licence? where is it showing? where on the page does it say it has licence?

Download the PDF. Look for the license. It's at the bottom of page 1.

"© The Author(s) 2020. This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/."

— Diannaa (talk) 13:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

hi, and thanx for all the help. I have a question: if I add to Wikipedia my own material based on a publication that it is not licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution, but with out any quotes or whole sentences from there, all in my own words, just using the main idea from there, can use that publication as a ref? Zvi grossnass (talk) 09:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

It's not recommended.— Diannaa (talk) 11:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

i want to make sure i wont get blocked again.... Zvi grossnass (talk) 12:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

New message from 25 Cents FC

Hello, Diannaa. You have new messages at 25 Cents FC's talk page.
Message added 13:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello. I have responded. 25 CENTS VICTORIOUS ^☣ 13:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Orang Asli

Hi again Diana, I just verified my email and would love it if you could send me my changes! I'll work on editing them :) I remember reading one of your comments and you mentioned that partial/majority/full paraphrase is preferred. If so, should my aim just be to paraphrase my edits as much as possible? Also, i'm curious why my link to the orang asli church was removed by itself (not really as part of a chunk), was there a problem with the source/website? Cheers! Nyoome (talk) 16:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students.

Of the four sources you appear to have copied from, this one does not look like a reliable source. Sorry I don't know why a link to the orang asli church was removed by itself; it does not appear that it was me that removed it. I am sending you a copy of a version of the page before I did the copyright cleanup.— Diannaa (talk) 16:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright

Hi Diannaa, I am just writing to you in regards to the 'Kondrati Ryleev' page, I have just recently inserted further information onto the page and just wanted to secure your approval or at least demonstrate that I have attempted to reduce any possible copyright claims. The book is purely the basis of the information not the wording or sentence format. The information has been changed but if there is a specific portion of the information that is too close I can gladly change it. Kind RegardsDanielLerish (talk) 18:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)DanielLerish

The new version looks okay.— Diannaa (talk) 14:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Joseph Sanchez

Hello! I came across an article at AfD that hit 92% on the Earwig test. I've cleaned up the copyvio, but the history remains, and I do not have the amazing skills you have at ferreting out the good and bad versions. Also I lack the revdel bit! Thanks in advance.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for your interest in copyright cleanup.— Diannaa (talk) 15:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you as always for your excellent assistance! You are immeasurably helpful.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:58, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Username change & copyrights on article edit

Hi Diana

After reading your message i've tried to figured out what changes can me made on the submission you removed but i don't see any. I've taking care of adding a lot of sources and didn't copy any text content except the article title. Many thanks for your help.

Itsacoolusername (talk) 14:08, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

The content was removed by someone else, and I later discovered it was copied from http://www.general-elektriks.com/bio-rv. — Diannaa (talk) 14:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Breakup of Yugoslavia

Dear Diannaa, thanks for the message. I apologize for the situation. I have already rephrased the sentences, I have written the ones that did not originally exist in the article. Maybe only one was copied. Can I still use the same article as the source? Kind regards.--WEBDuB (talk) 14:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

It looks like an okay source, but you have to re-write the material in your own words. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found.— Diannaa (talk) 22:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Battle of Dhi Qar

Hey Dianna, I just came across this article. It hit 86.0% on the Earwig's Copyvio Detector! Regards -TheseusHeLl (talk) 07:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Cleaned. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 10:44, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyvio, Shooting of Ahmaud Arbery

Hello Dianna, could you help me with revdels for a copyvio at Shooting of Ahmaud Arbery? Page history here. The original introduction of the copyvio took place at 7 May 2020‎ 08:34, by an IP editor. [5] The text was copied from this newspaper article. It was originally removed on 08:42. It was reintroduced with sourcing, on 7 May 2020‎, 08:57 [6], by Kwwhit5531, who was not aware that it was a copyvio. It was removed by me on [7] 7 May 2020‎, 10:11. Could you help remove the edits from 08:34 to 08:42, and 08:57 to 10:11? Thank you :) starship .paint (talk) 11:48, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

All done. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 12:38, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Cheers Diannaa. Thank you! :) starship .paint (talk) 13:44, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Tswana people Edit

Hello Dianna as one of the people who have been keeping an Eye on the Tswana People page there has been a misinformed edit which I hope you can take a look at. It is the addition of the Lozi as an ethnic group which is related to the Sotho Tswana group. The Lozi speak a corrupted version of the Old Sotho-tswana language as result of them being conquered by the invading makololo, they were initially linguistically not related to the Sotho-Tswana language group and only adopted it as a language of the conquerors. The Lozi (Barotsi) are rather related to other Zambian & Angolan neighboring tribes and were originally speaking Luya language as such its wrong to insert them into a Related ethnic groups with Sotho-Tswana people, same as we cant do that for any ethnic group that adopted a foreign language as now part of that ethnic group. I ask therefore thats such an edit be reverted & revised. links to support this are below: https://ajess.kibu.ac.ke/tracing-the-origins-development-and-status-of-lozi-language-a-socio-linguistics-and-african-oral-literature-perspective/ https://www.jstor.org/stable/1158780?seq=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 168.167.79.74 (talk) 11:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I don't know anything about this topic and I don't have time to research it.— Diannaa (talk) 11:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright infringement on Draft:Minisat 01

Just wanted to thank you for letting me know about the copyright infringement I committed on Draft:Minisat 01. I wholeheartedly understand the need to keep Wikipedia out of legal trouble, what I wasn't aware of, was that the rules also applied to drafts. Rest assured I wasn't planning on letting the article like that, I was just adding the main source as a reminder before I checked the rest and rewritten everything. Anyhow, thank you again for your great job and for letting me know :) Escorxador (talk) 15:01, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Pashupati seal

Thanks! Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 15:52, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

Licensing for Nature open access article

I was just reviewing Draft:Chromatin_assembly_factor_1 and noticed a big chunk of it was copied from here [8]. The license statement on Pubmed says Users may view, print, copy, and download text and data-mine the content in such documents, for the purposes of academic research, subject always to the full Conditions of use: [9], which doesn't sound to me like it would permit reposting the material on Wikipedia, so I removed it as a copyvio. But then I read this page, which states All open access articles published in Nature Research Journals are published under Creative Commons licenses...The licence used for OA articles in Nature Research subscription journals is CC BY 4.0. However... the article is open access on PubMed Central but is paywalled on the Nature site, so I'm not sure if it's even considered open access. Hoping you can clarify how this content is actually licensed, since it'll decide whether or not I can accept the draft. Thanks, SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 01:08, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

"Open access" means you don't have to pay money to view the article. It's unrelated to licensing. There's no compatible license on the source webpage; therefore the material enjoys copyright protection. Fun fact: The draft is a copy of CAF-1, where the copyright material is also found. I will fix this.— Diannaa (talk) 01:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Good to know, thanks for the quick reply and for fixing the copyright issues :) SpicyMilkBoy (talk) 01:44, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

No problem, and thanks for your interest in helping out with copyright cleanup. — Diannaa (talk) 01:46, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Use of photo question

Hello Diannaa, I like the photo of the Lennon wall in Prague on your userpage. I was in Prague late last year and have a a few photos that I took of the wall while there. My purpose in writing to you involves another photo I took of a mural. The mural was done by an artist of a well known band on a building on a public street, prominently viewable. Other photos of this mural have been published in several online articles and in newspapers. Can I upload the photo that I took on Wikimedia Commons? I find it very difficult to understand the copyright issues. Forexample, why are editors allowed to upload photos from Pinterest? Thank you for all of your work on Wili[edia. BuffaloBob (talk) 22:22, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Editors are not allowed to copy photos from Pinterest. All photos you upload must be your own work, or compatibly licensed. It's okay to upload your own photos to the Commons. Try using the Special:UploadWizard and it will guide you through the whole process.— Diannaa (talk) 11:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your edit

Hi Diannaa, I was just notified about your changes on the article I'm currently working on. Though I respect the copyright rules of wikipedia, I just want to ask a question.

As the paragraphs that were deleted contained historical information, there is little change that can be made in order to keep the meaning of the text the same. In addition, the information that I added, greatly improved the article's condition and I don't think it should be permanently removed. Therefore, is there a way that I could rewrite the information, in a way that I won't be accused of plagiarism?

Your help you be much appreciated! Thanks in advance!

JohnKonstas29 (talk) 15:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

London Agreement on German External Debts. I have sent you the removed material via email. Everything you add to Wikipedia needs to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. If you are unable to do this, don't re-add it. There's more than 550 words of copied content here, which is unacceptable and a violation of our copyright policy.— Diannaa (talk) 15:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I have sent you an email. You can contact me through email for future conversations. Thanks again.JohnKonstas29 (talk) 16:12, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

No thank you. I prefer not to correspond via email.— Diannaa (talk) 16:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I have checked the material you sent via email and it looks okay from a copyright point of view.— Diannaa (talk) 22:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Much obliged! JohnKonstas29 (talk) 07:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you

Diannaa - Thank you for your editing. I think my contribution was delete because it was verbatim from the source, correct? If so, I understand and I have taken a note of it. I have a question - if the source is a government website (i.e. clearly public domain), could I use the words verbatim? What is the policy guidance? Jlarxy — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jlarxy (talk • contribs) 21:32, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright law varies, depending on the country. Government works in India are not in the public domain. Please don't copy their webpages.— Diannaa (talk) 21:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Samyaza

Thanks for the warning, but that copied info didn't come from me, but from the former article Ouza, now turned into a redirection to Samyaza. Creador de Mundos (talk) 15:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

In the future, when copying or moving content within Wikipedia, please say so in your edit summary. In fact, our license requires that you give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this licensing requirement when copying within Wikipedia in the future. — Diannaa (talk) 15:56, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

iOS Release Notes Copyright Issues

IOS version history

I don't understand how release notes for iOS versions can be copyrighted. There are no issues with the rest of the article, and its supposed to be a record of iOS versions and their release notes. Maybe I don't understand copyright here, but the iOS release notes copied from the support article are just text. I'm fairly certain Apple does not mind if they're stored on Wikipedia for preservation reasons. The text should be reinstated, otherwise the article is going to miss a huge chunk of release notes. - Kamran Mackey (talk to me · my contributions) 17:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

The source webpages at Apple's website are clearly marked as copyright, which means we can't host the content here unaltered. It's a violation of our copyright policy to do so. It doesn't matter whether Apple would mind or not, because our own policy does not permit it.— Diannaa (talk) 17:18, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't see on Apple's support site where the articles are under a copyrighted license though. And the content was altered. I modified the text so that way it wasn't 100% in line with the support article and it was reverted anyways. That text needs to be there otherwise the article is missing a pretty substantial chunk of release notes. - Kamran Mackey (talk to me · my contributions) 17:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Here is where I found the matching content. The copyright notice says "Copyright © 2020 Apple Inc. All rights reserved.". Clicking on "Terms of Use" reveals in part that "...no part of the Site and no Content may be copied, reproduced, republished, uploaded, posted, publicly displayed, encoded, translated, transmitted or distributed in any way...without Apple’s express prior written consent." I checked with Earwig's tool and discovered that all the content I subsequently removed was copied unaltered from Apple. Here is a link to the initial bot report that brought me to the article. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found.— Diannaa (talk) 18:05, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Coming back to this again. Please use a better eye on what you revert. You removed 3000 bytes of my work for no apparent reason. Sure some of the stuff I wrote was similar to the release notes, but there are only so many ways of writing release notes. No other editor except for maybe one other has taken issue with using the iOS release notes from the knowledge base articles. People freely use them for news and blog articles among other uses so I don't understand why Wikipedia is somehow banned from using the official release notes? It's literally just text. The footer is a generic All Rights Reserved footer applied to all pages on the Apple domains. Now I have to go back and carefully see what you removed and reinstate it. I don't appreciate stuff being removed without it being discussed first. Instead of recklessly reverting another editor's work, why not bring it up with the editor, see how they can fix the copyright issues? I also don't like how I can't view old revisions once you have used whatever tool you used to remove "copyrighted content". Also, another thing: I'd strongly suggest editing long articles by section instead of loading whole pages into the Visual / Source editors. Saves a lot of time and won't be so slow. - Kamran Mackey (talk to me · my contributions) 12:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Kamran Mackey: The page has an HTML document size of 1165 kB. It is the second longest article on the wiki. People using slow connections or dial-up or older mobile devices will not be able to load the page at all. It's a problem not only for editors, but also for our readers. — Diannaa (talk) 12:54, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm fairly certain dial-up connections are no longer that common, and most users aren't viewing an article as long as the iOS version history article on a mobile device anyways. There is no reasonable chance of the article being condensed. It is a record of iOS versions and their release notes, so it's going to be long, and it will only get longer as newer iOS versions are released. - Kamran Mackey (talk to me · my contributions) 13:02, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

You are correct that new iOS versions will continue to be produced. Therefore the article needs to be split. Please stop removing the "long article" maintenance tag. Word count is 72010 words - recommended size is 10000 words maximum. — Diannaa (talk) 13:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Splitting for more information on how to perform a split, should you decide to take this on.— Diannaa (talk) 13:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

If nobody has bothered to split the article by now, is there really a reason to? The article is not meant to be read in full. It is meant to allow users to jump to the section they want without forcing them to jump between articles just to get the content they want. Yes, it's big, but it has over 12 years of history behind it so of course it's going to be big. - Kamran Mackey (talk to me · my contributions) 13:24, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes there really is a reason to, because the page is already seven times the recommended size and will continue to grow. — Diannaa (talk) 13:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I disagree with your stance of wanting to divide the iOS version history into separate pages. You're the only one I've seen bringing it up and it has never once been brought up on the Talk Page so I'm guessing it really isn't anyone's top priority. It's one page out of the millions of pages and content on the wiki. If it's big, it's big. I'm fairly certain Wikipedia doesn't care. It has been bigger than the recommended page size for years and nobody has bothered to bring up the idea of splitting, so I personally don't think it matters and as such I will not be pursuing the split idea at this current point in time. Sorry. I should say though that I'm not going to completely dismiss the idea permanently, I will think about it now and again. - Kamran Mackey (talk to me · my contributions) 13:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Obviously you are under no obligation to do it. Simply leave the maintenance tag in place to help draw attention to the issue, and somebody who enjoys doing that type of editing will get to it sooner or later. Cheers, — Diannaa (talk) 13:38, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Actually I just got an idea. Why not move the Notable software bugs and issues in iOS section to its own dedicated page? Seems it would be better in its own page, since its not really related to the release notes of the iOS versions themselves. - Kamran Mackey (talk to me · my contributions) 14:04, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

That section is only 4719 words; so that would hardly make a dent in the page size. A better split would be to give each update its own page. i.e. split into thirteen pages.— Diannaa (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

That is a really bad idea. It would make navigating the article a living heck and I'm not even joking about that. There is nothing in that page that I find should be split then if not the problems section. Look at every other Version History page for example. They are all bigger than the maximum recommended page size. The iOS version history page just happens to be the biggest because Apple is really good at releasing large updates and writing long release notes and new feature lists while Android on the other hand typically releases pretty small updates in comparison so there isn't as much to write. The iOS version history page is big for that exact reason, Apple packs loads of features, bug fixes and tweaks into major updates, and not to mention they release some pretty big minor updates too, e.g. with iOS 11.3 for example a few years back. That was a pretty substantial update for a minor update. So there is no reasonable way to trim that article's size down because no version history page follows the stance of "put each version in its own article" and that would be quite difficult considering each major iOS release already has their own page. And each one redirects to the specific section of the version history article. I really think the iOS Version History article should be kept as is. There's no reasonable way to condense its size without causing pain for readers. - Kamran Mackey (talk to me · my contributions) 14:42, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

The history of each version could be transferred to the existing article of that version. Then we wouldn't even need a page called iOS version history. But actually you don't seem to care what I think about it so please stop posting here on this topic.— Diannaa (talk) 14:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

It's not that I don't care, because I do care. It's just that I don't understand your reasoning behind wanting to basically kill that article. That article has existed for 12 years. It's served as the primary source on Wikipedia for iOS versioning information for that long. I understand not wanting big articles so that way articles load quickly, but there's no reasonable way to do what you want without removing a major piece of history. You might be an administrator and of course I respect that, but you can't assume people want to make these changes. Yes the page is big and it takes a bit to load due to the amount of content, but it's the best way to view iOS version history and it has been that way since the page was created since Apple themselves don't maintain a version history for any of their operating systems and moving each version's version history to their iOS version counterparts would make the creation of the page at all quite useless. It was created as a way to maintain iOS version history without clogging up the main iOS versioning pages and I personally believe that should stay the case. I wasn't trying to irritate you, I just have a stance that I personally want to stick with. I'll stop now but I just wanted to say one final thing on the matter. - Kamran Mackey (talk to me · my contributions) 20:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Using Census data and information available on Govt.Websites

Hi, I am working on articles related to Districts and Towns in India. I need to use the information available on Government websites as well as the 2011 India Census report. Does using information and copying the data to articles violate wiki guidelines. The census report is in public domain. The data available on Government websites can be copied and pasted to wiki or is there a need to obtain some permission(there are not proper channels available to request such permission though). Please help me by clearing these doubts

Can the census report data be copy/pasted on Wiki along with data on Government websites after mentioning them in citations ?

Awaiting response AnM2002 (talk) 04:58, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

AnM2002, the Government of India census is not in the public domain. Their website is marked as copyright, and their text cannot be copy-pasted here.— Diannaa (talk) 11:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I have extensively gone through the Wiki guidelines regarding the matter and would abide. You can close this discussion.AnM2002 (talk) 12:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello

Hello friends Er. Hummy (talk) 05:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Crown Copyright

I have, in the past, reverted edits using material subject to Crown Copyright. My recollection was that the Crown Copyright allowed some re-use, but not enough to work for Wikipedia. However, I just saw this site being used, which has a Crown Copyright. The page links to Crown Copyright, which refers to the OGL, which appears to be acceptable. I briefly looked at Crown Copyright which informed me that the term covers an array of rules, so I shouldn't make blanket assumptions simply on the basis that a page asserts "Crown Copyright". I'm just checking with you to see if that matches your understanding.--S Philbrick (Talk) 12:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion the OGL is a compatible license as long as proper attribution is provided. I add this for attribution:

Text was copied from this source, which is available under an Open Government Licence v3.0. © Crown copyright.

— Diannaa (talk) 12:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, Thanks, I saved that text for future use. S Philbrick (Talk) 15:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright noticeboard?

Hey Diannaa, was wondering what you'd think of a copyright noticeboard, like the BLP/RS/COI ones? It could be a centralized page where people could bring their copyright issues/questions/complicated revdel requests (instead of your talk page!). It could also promote interest an copyptrol/cp/cci so new editors could get involved and it's not the same 7 admins working in the area forever. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 00:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Is Wikipedia:Copyright problems what you have in mind, or something more substantial? - BilCat (talk) 00:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

BilCat, Something more substantial, like AN for copyright. A place where admins in the know can act quickly on issues. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 00:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

That might work, — Diannaa (talk) 09:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Material from copyrighted sources

How can you state it's copyrighted? Did you check it? It's a public inquiry and thus isn't copyright-protected. It was edited and adequately referenced to. Please check the sources before editing out. Roccoooo (talk) 13:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Cavalese cable car disaster (1998). Works of the Italian government enjoy 20 years of copyright protection from the publication date, so the copyright on the source document expires on 7 February 2021.— Diannaa (talk) 22:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Mistake

Thank you for your message on my talk page. Please note that I did not mean to place that info on the page. It was meant for my sandbox to remind myself later. I was not meaning to post any of the charts, etc. I am aware of copyright violations. I did not mean for it to happen. It was an honest mistake. Adyereeves02 (talk) 14:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Adyereeves02: Our copyright policy applies to every part of Wikipedia, including sandboxes and drafts. Please don't include it anywhere. If you wish to save a document please do so in some other fashion, such as bookmarking a webpage or saving the material as a Word document.— Diannaa (talk) 22:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

In addition

The charts were meant to be looked at references for me only. Not published or reproduced in any way. I was going to take them out of the sandbox before publishing anything. It accidentally was put on the main page with the unintended charts. I do apologize for this awful mistake. Please do not hold this against me. I should have double checked and I just didn’t. I greatly apologize. Adyereeves02 (talk) 14:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

It's okay, now you know the rule, and can continue on, don't worry.— Diannaa (talk) 22:58, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

The Way of St Andrews

Dear Danaa, Thank you for your message , I presume, represents the official voice of Wikipedia. I do get confused with advice from other parties! In answer to your points I quite understand your concerns and my comments are below 1. I am not sure I entirely understand your point about copyright unless providing links to our maps on the Bikemap website contravenes your rules. I would be grateful for clarification. Also, is anything else where you think I am breaching your copyright rules? 2. I am a bit puzzled why you have removed two sections, How the Relics of St Andrew Came to Scotland and How St Andrew Became the Patron Saint of Scotland. I think these are important parts of the story and I would like to see the sections restored. 3. I see that you have removed the final paragraph of the first modern Pilgrims to St Andrews. what is your objection, and is it just a case of rephrasing? 4. In the routes section I see you have allowed some short descriptions and eliminated others. I would be grateful for an explanation. 5. I look forward to hearing from you. 6. With regards to conflict of interest I have declared it in Edit Summaries, and from my understanding of the rule that is sufficient. I hope so. 7. Regards Hugh, secretary, the Way of St Andrews — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hughlockhart (talk • contribs) 16:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works. Both the thewayofstandrews.com material and the bikemap website enjoy copyright protection, so you can't copy it here. Some content was left in in instances where I was unable to find it elsewhere online.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page.

Some of the material I removed because it had no sources, and some I removed as it was tour-guide-like material inappropriate for inclusion in the encyclopedia. — Diannaa (talk) 22:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear Danaa, Thank you for your reply. For simplicity sake I think I will tackle all points one by one. My first point is to clarify your status. Do you have a contract with Wikipedia? If so, please provide me with your terms of reference. If you do not have a contract with Wikipedia but are a volunteer editor I hope that you would pick up my request to other editors that they inform me the changes they would like to make and discuss them beforehand. I look forward to hearing from you. Regards,

Hugh Lockhart — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hughlockhart (talk • contribs) 09:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

I am a volunteer, just like all the other editors. Nobody is obligated to check with you before editing the article.— Diannaa (talk) 13:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Dear Danaa, Thank you for your response and confirmation that you are a volunteer editor with Wikipedia. You state that you are not “obligated” to inform the lead editor of your changes in advance. I do understand that this is the case but surely you will agree that you have a moral duty - or even out of common courtesy - to contact the lead editor with your recommendations beforehand? To me, some of your changes and deletions are inexplicable. For instance, I have already referred to 2 sections which you have removed which tell an important part of the story. I would be grateful for your specific reasons or indeed, constructively, how, in your opinion they could be improved by modification. I think that is a good place to start, and then we can move on to the other areas.

I look forward to hearing from you HL — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hughlockhart (talk • contribs) 11:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Our articles do not have any such thing as a "lead editor" and nobody is owner of a page or gets to be in charge of what it contains, not even the person who created the page or the fellow with a conflict of interest who works at the place. Please see the policy page Wikipedia:Ownership of content for more information on this topic. Nobody is going to send you an email to get your pre-approval of their edits; some of the people that have edited the page since my last visit are highly experienced Wikipedians that are familiar with our policies and guidelines and have every right to edit the page, because that's how Wikipedia works: it's a collaborative encyclopedia (not a place for businesses to post a profile of their enterprise). I already mentioned in my edit summary and here on this page why I removed two paragraphs: I removed some because it had no sources, and some I removed because it is tour-guide-like inappropriate material. Please see the policy page Wikipedia:Verifiability regarding unsourced content; please see the policy page WP:NOTGUIDE as to why we don't tell people where to find accommodation or how to best manage their visit to the site. Some of your additions have also been removed by other editors and they said why in their edit summaries. If you don't know how to find the page history so that you can review other people's edit summaries please let me know and I will explain it to you.

A couple of minor points: if you could take the time to get my username right, and if you could learn how to sign your posts, that would be great. — Diannaa (talk) 12:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

I made An actual CC notice for talk pages

At User:Moneytrees/cccopy:

== Creative Commons Attribution ==

{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px|alt=Information icon]]}}} Thank you for [[Special:Contributions/{{<includeonly>safesubst:</includeonly>BASEPAGENAME}}|your contributions]]. It seems that you may have added [[WP:COMPLIC|Creative Commons licensed text]] to one or more Wikipedia articles{{<includeonly>safesubst:</includeonly>#if:{{{1|}}}|, such as [[:{{{1}}}]]}}. You are welcome to import appropriate Creative Commons licensed content to articles, but in order to meet the Wikipedia [[Wikipedia:Plagiarism|guideline on plagiarism]], such content must be fully attributed. This requires not only acknowledging the source, but acknowledging that the source is copied. There are several methods to do this described at [[Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Compatibly-licensed sources]], including the usage of an [[:Template:CC-notice|attribution template]]. Please make sure that any Creative Commons content you have already imported is fully attributed. Thank you, ~~~~

Though you'd find it useful. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 00:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!— Diannaa (talk) 00:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

There's also a lot of stuff at User:Diannaa/Copyright and User:Ninja Diannaa/sandbox (open in an editing window for easy copypasta) — Diannaa (talk) 00:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Still grateful

My thanks to you is still enshrined at Wikipedia:Old-fashioned_Wikipedian_values --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Dweller! Good to hear from you. — Diannaa (talk) 13:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright 2

I have not received a reply from you on my talk page so I needed ask this question on yours. I would love to know, in which edits of mine was the content copied from somewhere? Bhattakeel9 (talk) 22:44, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 12:10, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Dynamic tonality

Dianaa: In the article "Dynamic tonality," you deleted (three hours ago) the section on timbre effects, noting correctly that it lifted much of its text from the cited X_System paper. I was a co-author of that paper, which was written as a technical report of Thumtronics Pty Ltd, which I owned, and which died an ignominious death in 2009 (although its ideas live on!). I own the defunct company's IP. Having written the quoted paper's section on timbre effects, I could find no clearer or more concise way to express the quoted ideas, so I used (mostly) my original wording (with a citation).

I expect to follow the instructions described here to inform Wikipedia that I am publishing the X_System paper under the Creative Commons International Share-alike License 4.0. Please note that this email cannot come from the defunct company's email domain, as that was released when the company defunctified.

Will that address your concern, such that the content can be restored to the article?

Respectfully,

JimPlamondon — Preceding unsigned comment added by JimPlamondon (talk • contribs) 23:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mr Plamondon. You are on the right track with that email, but please note that all three of the paper's authors will have to agree to its release under license. — Diannaa (talk) 12:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

They have already so agreed, and will be copied on the email to Wikipedia. Thanks! --JimPlamondon (talk) 03:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Said email has been sent as per instructions here, copying the co-authors. I do not know your email address, so I could not copy you; however, the issue's ticket number is 2020051810000964. Having sent the email, I will wait one week (until Monday 25th my time) and then revert your edit to restore the deleted content (unless you beat me to it). ;-) --JimPlamondon (talk) 03:46, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Both of my co-authors commented on how EXTREMELY quickly, efficiently, and politely Wikipedia handled this issue. We hereby doff our hats to you, to Nathaniel Tang, and to all Wikipedians. Thank you! Next time I'm not broke, I will be sure to express my appreciation in a more tangible form. ;-)

And with that, this issue is closed. --JimPlamondon (talk) 14:48, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks JimPlamondon - {{cookies}} are always welcome!— Diannaa (talk) 15:20, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

David Castle

Is there any way you could help me with this? Seriously, I'm not all that wiki savvy. I assure you that I got that image from his widow, but there really is very little I can do other than give you that assertion. I was on the phone with Mrs. Castle, and I asked for a picture that she had the rights to. I told her to please make certain that it was one that she had the rights to. I didn't want anything that was used for promotion of any sort. If you have one where he's sitting at the table at a diner with a plate of wings in front of him, that would be great. She sent me this picture. Is there any way you could do the edits on the file to make it within the guidelines, because I'm at a complete loss.Johnny Spasm (talk) 11:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

File:DavidCastlePiano.jpg. We need to have documentation from the copyright holder that shows they have given permission for the photo to be copied to this website and is compatibly licensed. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa (talk) 13:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

She's supposed to email this to me? This is all so confusing.Johnny Spasm (talk) 21:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

No. The copyright holder sends their email directly to permissions-en@wikimedia.org — Diannaa (talk) 22:03, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

I'll get in touch with Mrs. Castle later today. She lives in California, so it's still a little early to bother her. Is it possible that Wikpedia can be a little patient with me getting this done?Johnny Spasm (talk) 14:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Files normally get deleted a week after being tagged. That said, it's easy to restore it when the required permission is received. — Diannaa (talk) 14:49, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright takedown

My edit to the page Anti-defection law in India did not contain material from copyrighted sources. The content you removed is not copyrighted but derived from open Government of India reports and documents. Also the link [10] you quoted for the content does not own the content neither the content I had published was exactly same as on that link. I have re-edited the page more comprehensively. Please note that the content I have added is free. SillyLocation (talk) 06:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Works of the Indian government are not in the public domain, but enjoy copyright protection for 50 years from publication date.— Diannaa (talk) 11:24, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Message from Neith-Nabu

As a matter of urgency, please reply to your comment on my Talk Page, as your actions do not appear to be within the guidelines - for example, reverting deletions of text cannot possibly involve copyright violations. Neith-Nabu (talk) 09:18, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Edits to F.T.A. Page

Hi Diannaa, I'm curious why you deleted a substantial section from this article (F.T.A.) as "non-free content". It was all taken from secondary sources and cited. Please explain.JohnKent (talk) 16:09, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Normally we write Wikipedia articles in our own words rather than by stringing together a bunch of quotations. Excessive non-free content is a violation of our non-free content policy.— Diannaa (talk) 18:17, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'll rewrite.JohnKent (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Dynamic tonality 2

OTRS agent (verify): Hi @Diannaa: Under Ticket:2020051810000964, OTRS has received and I have accepted permission for the document "X_System.pdf" under the dual licence of {{cc-by-sa-3.0}} and {{Gfdl}}. The deleted content can now be restored. --Ìch heiss Nat ùn ìch redd e wenig Elsässisch!^{Talk to me in EN, FR, PL, GSW-FR(ALS).} 06:25, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Done— Diannaa (talk) 11:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyvio assessment

Diannaa, you have removed content recently from Multi-stage flash distillation. The same editor has just restored much of the deleted content. I don't have access to the source text (Fundamentals of Flash Desalination) that you claimed the prior content copied, so I'll ask you to assess again, thanks! WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:29, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thanks WikiDan61.— Diannaa (talk) 15:45, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia

72.255.58.50 (talk) 16:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC) Dear Diannaa, you have shared following message/ comment on List of Pakistani Peace Laureates 'Attribution: text was copied from Order of Merit of the Italian Republic on May 17, 2020. Please see the history of that page for full attribution.' Kindly guide me what do I need to do? I just copied a single sentence about Order of Merit of the Italian Republic only to introduce that award. If you want me remove that sentence then I can surely delete it. Please guide me.

You don't need to do anything for this edit - I have already added the required attribution. Please do it in the future though, if you copy within Wikipedia again.— Diannaa (talk) 16:20, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

72.255.58.50 (talk) 11:07, 20 May 2020 (UTC) Thank you really very much Diannaa for your help and support.

Mystic Messenger article

Did I miss the URL that you removed after I had removed one myself? If so, thanks!Wzrd1 (talk) 16:43, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright Inquiry

Hi Diannaa, can you please advise on how wikipedia can accommodate our changes to Alex Prager's page? We are using trying to cite text from our own press release with Lehmann Maupin. Is there a way to use this text/information in a way that abides by Wikipedia’s copyright guidelines? Thanks! Alex Prager Studio (Bvpicts)

Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about yourself or a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. Regardless of the copyright issue, material that's worded like a press release is not the type of encyclopedic content we are looking for. — Diannaa (talk) 21:07, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Sidney Blumenthal

Regarding the Blumenthal article I still don't understand why the material from Vanity Fair is copyrighted? There are hundreds of examples of quotations from the New York Times, Washington Post, Vanity Fair, and the New Yorker-- the amount allowed is about 100 words. Why is this instance different? Also, INFORMATION ITSELF IS NOT COPYRIGHTED. How could it possibly be a copyright violation to paraphrse what the Vanity Fair article said.

This makes no sensse. Please explain before you revert material twice.

@Cathradgenations: There were no quotation marks. — Diannaa (talk) 22:44, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dianna: Apologies. I'm a bit new to this. So if you use quotation marks, you are fine and not in a copyright violation? I did not realize that I left something out of quotation marks if I did that.

So its ok to cite a publication and quote from its article as long as quotation marks are used? And it is alright as well to paraphrase as long as you don't use quotation marks I assume. Thanks again for the guidance and assistance!

Normally we write Wikipedia articles in our own words rather than by stringing together a bunch of quotations. Excessive non-free content is a violation of our non-free content policy. So please re-write things using your own words. — Diannaa (talk) 23:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Dvaitadvaita

Hi @Diannaa: This is an astonishing 96% positive. [11]. Can you please expidite. scope_creep^Talk 14:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

It came from Previous revision of Kumāra Sampradaya— Diannaa (talk) 14:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Renaissance Workshop Company

At the end, everything about the Renaissance Workshop Company has been removed in favour of the Early Music Shop in Saltaire. As usual.

Fortunately, the truth will keep being the truth independently what is stated in the wikipedia.

Kind regards 81.34.79.85 (talk) 20:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

K-Rail (Kerala Rail Development Corporation)

Please could you have a look at the above page. I removed one probable copyvio but I think there are more.SovalValtos (talk) 11:34, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Done Thanks for the report— Diannaa (talk) 11:56, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your many actions. I am hesitant about making direct reports as I feel I should be able to deal with things myself. However experience has shown that my ponderous efforts requiring frequent checking with policies and guidlines are time consuming and still not done as well as hoped. So with your permission I will take advantage of the collaboration of an expert with procedures at their fingertips and I will refer more in future. Best wishes.SovalValtos (talk) 12:23, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Please feel free to post here, no problem. This one was actually pretty complicated. — Diannaa (talk) 12:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

I need your help

Help me sir "Jat people" have to get some correction in Wikipedia page. Have some data deleted Sunny 04:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sunny bharat (talk • contribs)

About the material I added to Maharajah Surajmal

No it was not directly copied from Other sites. I also cited the needed sources Ponia.sp (talk) 21:32, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright Inquiry - Industrial espionage

Regarding the changes you made to Industrial espionage curprev 19:05, 21 May 2020‎ Diannaa talk contribs‎ 62,182 bytes -1,316‎ remove copyright content copied from https://www.history.com/news/industrial-revolution-spies-europe and quotations

I’ve already rewritten it once. I’ve cited all quotations (original sources and the article in question), plus I’ve checked against plagiarism in Grammarly. Happy to correct any issues if you point them out. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.69.127.135 (talk) 11:29, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Source document:

The Founding Fathers not only tolerated intellectual piracy, they actively encouraged it. The quickest way to close the technological gap between the United States and its former motherland was not to develop designs from scratch—but to steal them. In his 1791 “Report on Manufactures,” Hamilton advocated rewarding those bringing “improvements and secrets of extraordinary value” into the country. Under the Patent Act of 1793, the United States granted dubious patents to Americans who had pirated technology from other countries at the same time that it barred foreign inventors from receiving patents.

Your addition:

The Founding Fathers not only tolerated intellectual theft but they also actively encouraged it. The quickest and surest way to close the technological gap between the United States and the European Powers was not to develop designs from scratch but to steal them. American founding father and first U.S. Treasury Secretary Alexander Hamilton in his report Report on Manufactures advocated rewarding those bringing “improvements and secrets of extraordinary value” into the United States. Under the Patent Act of 1793, the United States barred foreign inventors from receiving patents at the same time as granting patents to Americans who had pirated technology from other countries.

Overlapping content is highlighted in Bold. I also removed a quotation ( "As stated by the historian Doron Ben-Atar the United States 'emerged as the world’s industrial leader by illicitly appropriating mechanical and scientific innovations from Europe.'") — Diannaa (talk) 11:47, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Query regarding upload of a file

Hello, Diannaa. This is in regard to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography#Uploading policy – question. Aparna Rao died in 2005, and a quick search shows that there are just two copies (of her same pic) available online – coloured copy and black-and-white copy (see page no. 6) – both of which are copyrighted. User Мастер Шторм wants to upload the coloured copy. I guess it meets the WP:NFCC#1 and can be uploaded to this project. And I guess they can use the {{Non-free use rationale}} at the file page. But I want to crosscheck about it. So, is it fine to upload it here? - NitinMlk (talk) 17:06, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Please use the color version - it's likely the original. — Diannaa (talk) 18:01, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Мастер Шторм, you can upload it to this project. - NitinMlk (talk) 18:04, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, NitinMlk and Diannaa. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 19:55, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, NitinMlk and Diannaa. I have uploaded File:Aparna Rao (anthropologist).jpg. I request you to kindly go through the "summary" provided by me, and advice me if any change is required to be done to that. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 22:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello Мастер Шторм. Your formatting of the template and permissions is very well done. Thank you for taking the time to do that.— Diannaa (talk) 01:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Lake County wine copyright-infrinement

"(remove copyright content copied from https://www.lakecountywinegrape.org/region/lake-county-ava/kelsey-bench-ava/, https://www.lakecountywinegrape.org/region/lake-county-ava/kelsey-bench-ava/)" I thought I referenced the material from these documents correctly and reread the Wiki guidelines. Apparently, I should further reword the text while still conveying similar information. Thanks for noting this though I wished I could view my exact entries for comparison. Ciao. --Aspenbear (talk) 19:47, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

No that is not correct. Normally we write Wikipedia articles in our own words rather than by stringing together a bunch of quotations. Excessive non-free content is a violation of our non-free content policy.— Diannaa (talk) 21:31, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I will send you the removed material via email. Please make sure that the content is re-written completely. — Diannaa (talk) 12:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Content Copied From Other Website

Thanks for your response to a recent edit attempt. Indeed I cut and paste from one primary site. Though I referenced the link, I now get that I should have put it in quotes and footnoted. That correct?

Thanks again for your help!

Seattle98121-3881 (talk) 20:40, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

No that is not correct. Normally we write Wikipedia articles in our own words rather than by stringing together a bunch of quotations. Excessive non-free content is a violation of our non-free content policy.— Diannaa (talk) 12:30, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Recent edits on St. Edward's School, Shimla

You undid edits made by User:Petrolhead 838 from the article St. Edward's School, Shimla asit was copied. But actually it is the official website of the school and the owners do not have any issues regarding it being used in Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by UlaBrita 838 (talk • contribs) 22:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

The school's website is marked as "© Copyright 2017 All rights reserved" so no, we are not allowed under Wikipedia policy to host the content here. If the copyright holder wishes to release this material under a compatible license, please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent.— Diannaa (talk) 22:38, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

UPLB Museum of Natural History

What were you trying to do here?

{{Cite web|title=UPLB Museum of Natural History|url=https://university-museums-and-collections.net/philippines/museum-of-natural-history|last=|first=|date=|website=Worldwide Database of University Museums and Collections|url-status=lhighlighive|archive-url=|archive-date=|access-date=May 14, 2020}}

Brianjd (talk) 13:48, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

It's just a typo. I have fixed it. Thank you, — Diannaa (talk) 14:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyrights issue

72.255.58.50 (talk) 13:58, 25 May 2020 (UTC) Dear Diannaa, thank you very much were notifying the copyrights issue. According to your instructions, I have updated the description and have added revised references to those 3 posts from the page List of Pakistani Peace Laureates and have removed previous references urls (timesofyouth.com, radio.gov.pk, and peacekeeping.un.org). New references and new descriptions have been added. Once again thanks for your guidance. Kindly check the page and re-confirm if everything is OK now.

No it is not. You re-added the same text, while citing a different source. The material is still copyright. Please stop.— Diannaa (talk) 14:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

72.255.58.50 (talk) 14:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC) Dear Diannaa, I have changed the text and have written all the details in my own words now. Please check and re-confirm once again. Thank you for your kind cooperation and guidance.

Please see your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 14:29, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Pulahan

Regarding the recent removal of copyrighted removal from Pulahan, I am confused as to what exactly was the problem? A lot of material from that source still seems to be there. I wrote in my own words, I paraphrased the source. The only 1:1 copy is a quote, and quotes obviously should be copied and not paraphrased, but this quote is still there. I don't know where to find the iThenticate report. I would like to know what the -804 deleted bytes of material is and how to resolve the situation. Thanks. Glennznl (talk) 16:26, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap.— Diannaa (talk) 16:30, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Thanks for the reply Diannaa. I carefully re-added the part, rewriting as much as I could of it. I hope the issue has been revolved. Glennznl (talk) 17:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

The new version is still very close to the source, being only superficially paraphrased, and someone has removed it.— Diannaa (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Diannaa: That other person has since undone his reversion. I further changed the text as much as I could without deleting actual facts necessary for the reader. Glennznl (talk) 18:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

But I already said that it's still too close to the source, being only superficially paraphrased. So it needs more work please.— Diannaa (talk) 20:06, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

It presents the same ideas in the same order using almost the same wording. In a chronological account some similarity is inevitable, but it still needs more work. — Diannaa (talk) 20:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@Diannaa: I expanded the article and changed a lot of the still problematic parts. I believe it should be resolved now. Glennznl (talk) 23:15, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, okay now; very good work. Thank you for taking the time to do that.— Diannaa (talk) 23:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you too. Glennznl (talk) 23:36, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Minor edit copyright query

Thanks for your feedback, I've read the 'Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources' as requested. Could you could please let me know was this addition removed due to the copied website link sources? I'm a bit confused where I went wrong. Thanks so much Killim (talk)Killim (talk) 18:18, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

"Your addition to Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the arts and cultural heritage has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder'Killim (talk) 18:18, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 20:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Ah I see, thanks so much for clarifying, best wishes Killim —Preceding undated comment added 12:10, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

3DB /2UE - a follow-up.

Dear Diannaa,

Thanks for your comments re using material from the 3DB page in the 2UE page. As I clearly explained in my earlier response, the material on the 3DB page was originally submitted my me! In fact I started the 3DB page and have supplied the majority of the material therein - a check of the "history" of the 3DB page will confirm this.

I do hope that this clarifies the matter, but if you still have queries please don't hesitate to contact me.

Yours Albert Isaacs (talk) 23:31, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I think I should have known that; sorry for the irrelevant notice. — Diannaa (talk) 23:34, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your last comment. YoursAlbert Isaacs (talk) 23:28, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Thanks for the patrolling for CopyVio and other concerns. I saw one of your edits warning one of the #AfLibWk participants, and really appreciate using the less aggressive messaging. If you find folks who are not paying attention to your concerns, let me know and I can highlight them to the organizers. Sadads (talk) 15:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!— Diannaa (talk) 18:27, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Sadads. I am finding a lot of copyright issues with the content added with the tags #AfLibWk #1Lib1Ref. I would appreciate it if you could please have a word with the organizers that the participants need to be told about our copyright policy and expectations. Thank you!— Diannaa (talk) 12:19, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Examples from the last 2 days: Human rights in Zambia; ZCCM Investments Holdings; Asunafo North Municipal District; National Assembly of Zambia; Education in Nigeria; Afe Babalola.— Diannaa (talk) 12:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

I put a response in my professional capacity on the communications front with AFLIA: at User_talk:FNartey_(WMF)#African_Librarians_Week. Long and short answer: they are updating info to participants, we plan on doing more training in the future, and most of the editors seem to be learning well in the process. Thanks for the examples; we expect a lot of the activity to slow down over the weekend. Sadads (talk) 14:20, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

copying from fandom

Hi. I hope you are doing well. To put the question in short and simple: can we copy text from fandom if we attribute it to them in the edit summary? Not a blatant copy-paste, more like, with shallow re-wording. TPS too, are welcome for comment :) —usernamekiran (talk) 08:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

It's okay to copy from fandom/Wikia pages as long as you provide attribution. In addition to the edit summary, please leave an attribution template or statement on the page itself. There's a template {{cc-notice}} or you can leave a notice at the bottom of the page like I did here. But remember that Wikia/fandom pages are wikis and are not considered as reliable sources for most purposes, so please be selective about using them.— Diannaa (talk) 10:28, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyrights Violation

Nawab Afridi (talk) 08:47, 27 May 2020 (UTC) with reference to your allegations about my recent copyrights violation that made you believe I am someone else. I was not expecting silence from your side; also I was waiting for your action against my recent edits which really probably proved me a copyrights violator. Till today, you have not taken any action against those edits, so it means your allegations were certainly false. Anyways, this is only to mention here that wikipedia is a common place for admins and new commers and being a learner, I expect decency and cooperation of admins and editors, instead of false allegations and threats. Take Care (y)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 10:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi there, not sure if you can do revdel or not, but as I do know you work in copyvios, thought it might be likely. Do you think this is bad enough? its in the lead of a BLP (its been reverted twice already) [12] thankyou. Curdle (talk)

Done. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 13:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright of Godzilla 3-D (2007)

Where on the content source page does it say that the text is licensed under a CC BY-SA license? I tagged this page for speedy deletion because the website seemed to contain no copyright notice at all (and is therefore assumed to be all-rights-reserved). Passenger pigeon (talk) 12:54, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Their copyright policy is located at https://wikizilla.org/wiki/Wikizilla:Copyrights. — Diannaa (talk) 13:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

W. P. Andrew Lee page edits

Hi, I'm curious why the "Honors and Awards" and "Society Leadership" sections were removed from Dr. W. P. Andrew Lee's wikipedia profile? I worked with him personally to confirm the information is accurate. Can we please add it back? Thank you! RobertTBateman (talk) 22:23, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

We need independent sources for each award listed in the encyclopedia. If you are working on the article on behalf of the subject, you have a conflict of interest. If you are being paid to do so, you need to say so. I've posted some information on these topics on your user talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 22:26, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Advice is needed

Hi, it seems you are an eerie expert in history of the Dritte Reich. I'd like to ask your professional opinion on what needs to be done to successfully nominate "Ribbentrop" for GA? --Esperanto97 (talk) 10:35, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Here's how I do it: Make sure each fact has a citation. Check all the sources in the article and make sure they actually support the content. If I can't access the source book, I locate an alternate source. I see what books are available in my area or on inter-library loan and go through the article top to bottom, making sure all the main points are covered and everything has a source that I have personally checked so I can defend my choices to my GA reviewer. If I can't locate sources for the topic, I can't go to GA. All the images need to be checked for copyright status and appropriateness. Now might not be a good time for a GA nomination as the libraries are still closed and inter-library loans are not available either. Wikipedia:Good article criteria lists the actual GA criteria but I will typically go beyond this, formatting all the citations using citation templates and Harvard style references using the {{sfn}} template and making sure everything is super organized both inside and out. — Diannaa (talk) 10:57, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Reliable source

Hi Diannaa,

You're very good about preventing copyright infringement and such. I've made multiple articles about governmental nominees and appointments. One such is Leora Levy. I've used the White House website as a source, as that's where any nominee's initial biography is seen. I've used it multiple times as it relates to any nominee, now I'm being told by a user it's not a WP:RS and my edits are being reverted, especially as it pertains to Leora Levy. Is the White House website a WP:RS? Snickers2686 (talk) 15:18, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

That's a question better asked of the person who said so, or ask at the WP:RSNB.— Diannaa (talk) 21:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Bootleg Family Band

I invite related editors @Tobyjamesaus: (WP article creator) and @Dunks58: (Milesago article creator), to contribute to this discussion if they wish to.

I notice that, back in July 2016, you redacted some of Bootleg Family Band's early content with an edit summary, "remove copyright content copied from http://www.milesago.com/Artists/bootleg.htm". The website's copyright owner, Duncan Kimball, had previously released his contributions via this statement.

I have recently edited the WP article and added content referenced to Kimball's site but I can't tell if its any of the material which you redacted. Could you explain, why you believe that it is a copy violation? If so, I'll happily remove it.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 19:59, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

On July 9, 2016 (the date I removed the content), the website did not have the compatible license attached. Archived version dated March 10, 2016; archived version dated August 19, 2016. If you want to look at the August 19, 2016 archived version, the content that was identical was the prose starting "The band toured the USA with Cadd in May 1974" and proceeding to the end of the document. None of that content is present in the version that's released under license, so we can't copy it here. — Diannaa (talk) 21:16, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Keep up your good work.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:31, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Additionally, I just noticed that Kimball's site had this Archived version, dated 18 October 2009. Does this change the situation?shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:40, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

By the way, this notice is only on the "front page" of the website but not on individual pages.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 00:42, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

The copyright notice releases "all text of which I (Duncan Kimball) am the copyright owner" under license. In my opinion we have to assume that pages that do not have the license statement are not released under license. In other words, we can't assume that pages that are unidentified as his are available for us to copy. Regardless, the pages are available as sources of information; we just can't copy the prose.— Diannaa (talk) 09:40, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Without being a copyright lawyer, I read the first and second points to mean that if there is no separate direct attribution on a page then its content belongs to Kimball. That content is subject to the third point and its release for CC attribution-sharealike 3.0 applies. In any case, thanks for your advice.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 11:28, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Respectful Appeal of Recent Notice About Vandalism

Hello, you recently claimed the Ebi page was vandalized by me when, rather, I asked for citations to contentious sources, when I removed self-published material and citations, when I removed clearly self-promoting and marketed material that was not encyclopedic nor sourced after asking for citations for over a week, and then, unfortunately, ignored the vandalism removing my addition of cited references to documented and (now archived) videos and publish major news source articles about the BLP subject. Please provide any proof that WikiPedia guidelines were not being followed so that I can become a better editor. IMHO, the page is being manipulated by the promoters/marketing agents of the subject individual in the BLP via false reports of BLP violations by me. They are trying to use the WikiPedia article as a promotional material instead of how it is supposed to be used. How can I best address these issues in your opinion? Thank you.

I did not use the word vandalism. What I did was warn you not to post defamatory material about living people. Such material requires impeccable sourcing, not blogs, Twitter quotes, and YouTube videos as sources.— Diannaa (talk) 09:32, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Potential Copyvio

Hello Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of possible copyright content in the article Low head hydro power. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 14:19, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

This is a false positive.— Diannaa (talk) 22:14, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Supposed copyright problem on Béla Uitz

You put the following on my talk page: "Content you added to the above article appears to have been copied from https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00043249.1993.10791493 (visible at https://monoskop.org/images/b/b8/Botar_Oliver_AI_1993_From_the_Avant-Garde_to_Proletarian_Art.pdf), which is not released under a compatible license. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions. — Diannaa (talk) 13:29, 29 May 2020 (UTC)"

This is untrue. The material was not copied directly from any source and your claim that I have violated Wikipedia's copyright policy is untrue. It is also untrue that the material had to be removed for copyright reasons. All the content I added was in my own words. Indeed your comment when you removed the material was "too-close paraphrasing", indicating that you recognise that he material was not copied directly from the source that you suggest, and indeed that it was written in my own words. Please could you explain precisely why you felt my edit constituted close paraphrasing and how it ran foul of Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing.Leutha (talk) 15:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found. I was able to access a copy of the source document to assess manually, and felt that the overlap was too much.— Diannaa (talk) 22:17, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification.Leutha (talk) 12:37, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Copying from Wikipedia

You added this null edit to Marine viruses with the edit summary: "Attribution: some of the text in this article was copied from Virus. Please see the history of that page for full attribution". This explanatory supplement says: "you can copy parts of one Wikipedia article into another, but you must link to the source article in your edit summary". I think I have being doing that, as in this example. Was your edit summary intended as a prod to me to make fuller attributions? Should my brief "from virus" be expanded to "copied from virus", or further to "text copied from virus", or to the fulsome "text copied from Virus. Please see the history of that page for full attribution"? It's never been really clear to me what would be best practice, or at least adequate practice, both from the standpoint of practical editing and copyright law. — Epipelagic (talk) 18:51, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Epipelagic. My edit was in response to this edit that the bot found. You didn't mention a source page in your edit summary so I assumed you forgot, and added the dummy edit to provide the attribution edit summary. "from virus" would be an adequate edit summary. Best practice would be "Copied content from [[<page name>]]; see that page's history for attribution". Such an edit summary should be added for each individual edit that contains copying, but it's hard to remember to do that. If you are the sole author of the prose that was copied/moved, attribution is not required. But personally I tend to do it anyways. — Diannaa (talk) 22:07, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Right, thanks for that. It happens that the bot made a false call in this case. I used material already in the article (that had been copied from elsewhere but had been attributed) to expand the lede. When the lede has just been expanded, the bot should check first whether it has been expanded from material already in the article. — Epipelagic (talk) 22:35, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

The bot is not that clever. I am supposed to be the clever one, and I didn't notice that. — Diannaa (talk) 22:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Albert Doja

I understand your objection and motivation for speedy deletion. The draft is about my own page and there is no copyright infringment. If there is any problem, you may delete unsuited sentences or paragraphs, but please do not delete the page. Otherwise, there is no progress at all. I am sure that the page can and should be improved, but there must be a start. Hope you understand (if though I am not sure if there is here and if this is the right way to talk to you). 176.138.21.59 (talk) 19:19, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works. Sorry but we can't host copyright material on Wikipedia, not even temporarily for editing.

The second problem is conflict of interest. You imply that the draft is an autobiography. Writing an article about yourself or a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. ~~I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page.~~— Diannaa (talk) 22:42, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Common Wealth of Zion Assembly

Please see my recent edit [13] removing a possible copyvio. It is also him puffing himself.SovalValtos (talk) 07:57, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the report. I've done some revision deletion.— Diannaa (talk) 10:53, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Public domain question

This article has many problems. One of them is that it's a copy-paste from here. The text was published by the Indian government in 1934, so according to c:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/India, it's public domain. But it's my understanding that to be used on WP, works have to be PD in both the country of origin and the US, and this wouldn't be PD in the US since it was published post-1925. Am I correct in thinking this is G12-able? Thanks, Spicy (talk) 09:52, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Public domain#Country-specific rules states that "If the work was in the public domain in the country of origin as of January 1, 1996, it is in the public domain in the US. (Even if it was published after 1924, but only if no copyright had been registered with the US Copyright Office.)" Copyright of government works in India is for 60 years so the copyright on a document published in 1934 expired in 1994 in its source country. So this document is in the public domain in the US. See Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights as well to confirm.— Diannaa (talk) 11:12, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Ooh, I didn't know that. Thanks a lot for your help. Spicy (talk) 11:16, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

Asking a question

Hi, Hope that you will be fine. I'm here to ask 2 questions from you. 1st is I'm going to create an article named "List of most-viewed Atif Aslam's music videos on YouTube"(Atif is a singer). Can such an article be created? My 2nd question is that if I am granted the autopatroller or rollbacker or any other right, what if I don't use any right for 2 months. Would that right be taken away? Waiting for your answer... Thank you Empire AS (talk) 14:50, 31 May 2020 UTC Empire AS (talk) 09:50, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't see where any other musicians have such articles so I suspect a better choice would be to list some if his most-viewed videos in the article Atif Aslam instead. Once user rights are granted, they are normally not removed unless you abuse them.— Diannaa (talk) 13:48, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright help

I’ve been noticing a user adding copyrighted text to the United States Air Force Academy article world for world sometimes from USAFA.edu (which unlike the rest of the government, has indicated on its page that it’s copyrighted). I’ve reverted the changes and reviewed the current material, and notified the user, but wanted to make sure I’m doing my due diligence. Could you take a look and see if I’m missing anything? Garuda28 (talk) 22:28, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

You are correct the pages at https://www.usafa.edu/ are copyright and we can't copy from there. (But the pages at https://www.usafa.af.mil/ are okay to copy as long as proper attribution is given (for example with the{{PD-notice}} template). The current version of the article looks okay— Diannaa (talk) 14:16, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Jean Moulin

Hey you negationist please don't piss me off. I put this addition from another website but i cited the jewish virtual library as source. By this I don't add copyrighted material if I cite the source and more if I add this information of other way. I put all the sources. Why are you bother me?--FocoCasti (talk) 03:16, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

It's not okay to copy copyright text from other websites, even if you cite them as a source. To do so is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 11:03, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Then please revert and edit but avoiding to be a copy. That's all. And it's not necesary revert as I violated the terms of Wikipedia.--FocoCasti (talk) 15:06, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry but the patrolling administrator is under no obligation to re-write the content for you. — Diannaa (talk) 19:49, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Bitcoin SC

OTRS agent (verify): Hi @Diannaa and Widr: I have received an email and sufficient permission under Ticket:2020052910002291 for the copyright material used in the deleted draft. However, I noticed that it was previous deleted by Widr per G11 6 days prior to the deletion of the recreation under G12 by Diannaa. I took a look and it seems both versions are identical, so copyright is clearly not the sole issue. Thoughts on undeletion? --Ìch heiss Nat. 15:34, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

There's no sources other than the company website and no evidence of notability. If not an A7, it would be unlikely to survive AFD. Pinging user:Widr for comment.— Diannaa (talk) 19:53, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

You should do as you see fit. I don't really care either way. I deleted the page while I blocked the original creator for promotional username and promotional edits. Widr (talk) 20:02, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Revdel on Gerard & Kelly

Two users (likely the same user) at the above page persisted today in adding copyvio material. The last good version is this one, if you would care to rollback and revdel the bad ones. The current version shows 50% or so on Earwig, and an earlier version (960600334) shows 75%+. Thank you!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:48, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Done. Please don't tell people they're vandalizing when what they're actually doing is adding copyright material. That might be one reason why they were so persistent - it wasn't clear to them what was wrong. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 13:18, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! I actually did tell the first editor(Stelford91) that the edits were copyvio. Then an IP editor appeared minutes later, and started making edits that broke the formatting of the page. It's pretty clear they are the same person, as they made the same edits and added the same material. So I considered that they had been warned about copyvio. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 13:43, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay good that explains it, but it's still better to repeat your message re: copyvio in my opinion. — Diannaa (talk) 14:09, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. They were changing editing styles and accounts very quickly. One minute copyvio, then next minute breaking the formatting terribly. Will keep this in mind for next time.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:03, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Meredith Ringel Morris

Hi, this draft was mentioned at Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2020_May_27#possible_wikipedia_editing_scam by an IP account claiming that she was the subject, but "most definitely did not submit the article".

I have deleted most of the career section which was apparently copied from https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/people/merrie/ or https://cs.stanford.edu/~merrie/bio.html and warned the editor. The image also seems to have come from the Stanford page.

Please could you revision delete the copied material and advise on what to do about the image. TSventon (talk) 09:25, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Reveision deletion done. I have nominated the image for deletion on the Commons. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 13:25, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you help answer a copyright question?

There is a fair-use copyright question here [14] in the "Media" subheading. Do you mind going to that page and answering the editor's question? Thank you BetsyRMadison (talk) 13:07, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Done— Diannaa (talk) 13:30, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! BetsyRMadison (talk) 13:46, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Colin Thorne Copyright issue

Hi, at 23:17 on the 3 June 2020‎ you‎ removed copyright content copied from https://www.plaskynastoncanalgroup.org/app/download/5803777756/The+Cefn%2C+Cefn+Mawr++WTS+2016.pdf.

Thank you for bringing this document to my attention. However, I think there has been an error. The content removed used to be part of the Blue-Green Cities wiki page until it was decided it would be better with the other research projects on Colin Thorne's page.

I have a download from the original wiki page in October 2016 and, as referenced in the writing you removed, it all comes from academic articles written by the research consortium dating from 2014 onwards which was when the original BG cities page was made.

These articles started with Lawson, E., Thorne, C.,... & Kilsby, C. (2014). Delivering and evaluating the multiple flood risk benefits in blue-green cities: An interdisciplinary approach. D., Proverbs, & CA, Brebbia (eds), Flood recovery, innovation and response IV, 113-124.

It is clear the local Canal group you have referenced simply copied the old wikipedia page without referencing it to wikipedia or in fact to the authors of each of the points made in the text.

One of the dates on the document you sent is the 31/01/2018. If this is the date of creation then I can send the pdf of the original wiki page to prove that came first. I have contacted the Canal group to ask for the date of writing. Regardless it should be clear that the information I wrote was the fully referenced result of the work from the research consortium which this canal group had copied into their report.

I am relatively new to wikipedia, could you please advise what needs to be done next to get the section reinstated?

Kind Regards S.

Also thank you for pointing out the image I added had not had the permissions shown clearly. There were other identical images in the commons with the permissions included so I have replaced the image on Colin's page and will remove my upload from the commons shortly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Svalman (talk • contribs) 14:19, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

I have undone the revision deletion but have not re-added the content, as normally we don't give such extensive coverage of a person's projects on the page that is their biography. Sorry for the mistake. You can help prevent such mistakes by saying where you got the text when you copy from one Wikipedia article to another. In fact such attribution is required under the terms of our license. Please see WP:Copying within Wikipedia for more information.— Diannaa (talk) 14:28, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

List of speeches given by Vladimir Lenin

Dear Diannaa,

You have deleted part of the text which has nothing to do with marxists.org and its alleged "copyright", but was based on other sources I added. May you kindly advise why is that?
The small paragraph taken from Lenin Collected Works (published by numerous sources) most probably is not protected by any copyright, as it was ultimately written by an anonymous author form the Institute of Marxism Leninsm, USSR. So copyright is not the issue here, but I agree I could have changed / re-paraphrase it more. Would it be acceptable for you?

Thanks in advance, and don't hesitate to share the copyright status of Lenin Collected Works, if you are aware of it. Дружина (talk) 16:41, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. It's also a match for the content that I removed . The content is in Endnote #1. The source webpage is released under the GNU Free Documentation License, which is not a compatible license on its own. What makes marx.org a reliable source for facts about Lenin, a well-known historical figure? Surely more scholarly resources can be found? In my second edit I removed some material that was unsourced. It would be okay to re-add along with a citation.— Diannaa (talk) 20:23, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Alkinoos Ioannidis edits 23 February 2020 - remove copyright content copied from https://www.discogs.com/artist/1524562.....

I updated this wiki page as my first forage into wikipedia - updating the content and I had hoped properly linking to all the references i had entered (which were quite a few) including news reviews about his concerts etc. i did spend considerable time ensuring everthing was properly attributed following the guidance and i am gutted that everything has been removed. However I have no idea what I did wrong and how to fix as everything has been deleted - this is not useful. Please can you advise how to find a copy of what I wrote (I did not have an account at that point and was updating the entry with the direct knowledge of the artists management company). Please can you help? I did not want to press undo obviously but I do need to see the content as it took me ages on the night to find all the relevant articles and news stories (and I was particular about this as my degree was in Information Science (Librarianship)- thank you in advanced ImmortalitySou — Preceding unsigned comment added by ImmortalitySou (talk • contribs) 20:39, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

See our policy on copyright at WP:COPYVIO for an explanation of why your edit was reverted. He iro 20:42, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your input but the problem is I dont have a copy of what i wrote so how can I fix. I need to get a copy of my entry in order that I can fix - how do I do that? ImmortalitySou (talk) 15:30, 6 June 2020 (UTC) PS I have tried to review the deleted revision so i can fix it offline but I do not have the administrative rights to review - if someone has and can review the original entry text (it was a lot of work and took me hours) and send it to me on my talk page i can then see what i wrote and try to fix it. It is very hard for new contributors to work out what to do otherwise - please can someone help? thanks in advance ImmortalitySou (talk) 15:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

The content is a match for the material at Discogs: https://www.discogs.com/artist/1524562 — Diannaa (talk) 15:50, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa - sorry I am confused - and its really hard - i'm not sure i remember everything i wrote but one thing is I wrote both the greek and english titles of all his albums and as my greek spelling is not great i would have copied the greek title. However I am pretty sure I also had references to news articles/reviews from his appearances around the world ? I just need to see the content you reverted and also to understand why its an issue to have the title written in greek and in english? ImmortalitySou (talk) 22:01, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello ImmortalitySou. I've located the missing content and re-added it. It all needs sources please. Sorry for the mistake.— Diannaa (talk) 13:21, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa - thank you so much I have gone in and added the citations. I have added the names of his band members and some of the countries he has toured in (taken from his website). I have not added any more reviews but have added a note that he was meant to be touring the USA this year but this was postponed due to the pandemic. He has released two new songs on video but not sure about adding youtubelinks so decided not to include until i get the hang of adding info on wikipedia. There are also newer photos on his website to replace the rather old picture but again I am not sure about swapping over so have left for the time being. So much to learn. Please advise if anything is incorrect. Thanks so much again. ImmortalitySou (talk) 22:20, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Bad actor adding copyvio material to the Ancient Egypt article

Hi Diannaa, this user Strik3 has been at it again adding copyvio material to the Ancient Egypt article. Carlstak (talk) 00:07, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Earwig's tool is finding Wikipedia mirrors mostly. No need for revision deletion.— Diannaa (talk) 00:27, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. Carlstak (talk) 01:55, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Cut and paste move, ancient history

What can we do to salvage this cut and paste move from 2009: [15] [16] (NB: User has COI) Elizium23 (talk) 12:10, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

You can tag it for {{history merge}} and see if it's possible to fix. — Diannaa (talk) 11:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Done, thanks. Elizium23 (talk) 12:10, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for repairing my sentence. I forget to write with my own word after i copy that to remind me about what i wanna write. I am sorry about the copyright. Once again, thank your correcting the copyright strike — Preceding unsigned comment added by Agus Damanik (talk • contribs) 23:38, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Diana

Hi Diana

Thank you for your message re copyright violation on Beryl Bryden. I realise now that the source is not a good one although tried to use my own words on it. It now looks a lot better. Kind regards Martin mandtplatt

Mandtplatt (talk) 14:42, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

No Copy

Hi Diannaa,

I listed my sources and I didn't copy anything from the Ice Age Wiki. I don't even know if there's an article abot a potential Ice Age 6 there. That bit that the film is on hold due the Disney/Fox merger wasn't added by me. And I listed all the references.

190.237.88.205 (talk) 15:48, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

here is a link to the bot report. Here is the edit that triggered the report. The IPs match. Earwig's tool shows the overlap with the Ice Age Wiki. So no — Diannaa (talk) 15:55, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Where did I goof?

Not sure if this is how I use a talk page, but I received a notice that I violated a copyright on the Battle of Cynthiana page. Are you able to let me know what that was because I do not recollect copying anything that would have remotely been an issue. Thanks!

I don't remember it either since the edit took place back in 2016. The record shows I removed content that was a match for http://www.oocities.org/athens/sparta/1473/history.html.— Diannaa (talk) 20:39, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

A19470822 - Thank you for your welcome and comments on your delitions

Hello Dianna, Thank you for your welcome to Wikipedia. As you probably saw, I am new to this activity and I am stumbling along. It is quite overwhelming… Thank you for your guidance and suggestions. I will review the entries you deleted and will make sure that they are replaced with my own wording, follow the Wikipedia paraphrasing guidelines, and/or are substantiated by references to the leading current academic scholars. As you can see from my entries, I am mostly interested in substantiating Wikipedia articles with the latest academic research, mostly via better references. I have been reading articles in Wikipedia within my areas of interest (early civilizations, Roman Empire and comparative religion ) during the last couple of weeks. It is evident that some need substantial improvement Some of the current material stands on single sources, and does not include the latest research and scholarship. I hope this will be my contribution to Wikipedia. I am retired and have discretionary time to devote to this endeavor. I have been a reader and student of early civilizations, Roman Empire and comparative religion for many years. As per your suggestion, I will make sure that my contributions are either my words or are paraphrases of original sources, substantiated by references of leading researchers. As I work to improve the items you deleted/corrected, it would be very helpful if you include in your editing notes to me the specific grounds for your deletions (I tried to locate, but did not find). That will allow me to resubmit them properly. Again, thank you for your help and your welcome.User:A19470822;(talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:09, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Your additions were flagged by a bot. There were three bot reports, including one for your most recent addition:

Click on the iThenticate links to view the overlap. Your attempt to paraphrase is still not sufficient. Also, please place a citation at the end of your addition. This should be done each time you add content.— Diannaa (talk) 11:53, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

RE: Center for Advanced Legal Studies - Thank you for your updates

I will go back, review your edits and rewrite the sections. Thank you for your help! Therosebrand (talk) 22:07, 7 June 2020 (UTC) User:therosebrand;(talk)

List of Pakistani Peace Laureates

Hello Diannaa, hope you are fine. I need to discuss something. In our wikipedia page List of Pakistani Peace Laureates, we added detail about "Nigerian Peace Award" a few weeks ago, which is being copied by an online magazine, Pakistan Christian Post in their web-article (https://www.pakistanchristianpost.com/regional-news-details/1288) on 07-June-2020. I have mentioned the same link in reference too. I asked Monika to make some changes in our paragraph and she has tried too but I need to discuss it with you. Please check it and kindly confirm as it is not a copyright violation at our end because that website has copied our content on 7th June 2020 (which was actually written by us on wikipedia) many days ago. Your cooperation and guidance is needed please. Nawab Afridi (talk) 09:32, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 13:11, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you really very much Diannaa for your cooperation. Nawab Afridi (talk) 13:46, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright: Earthianyogi

Hello Diannaa, I noticed that you left a message on my talk page. Is there a specific reason for it? For example, did you notice an issue with the article that I recently created? I did have some issue with the article I created on Copula, for which I did hold the copyright, but I was asked to get permission from another co-author, so I dropped the idea. For other articles, I may have taken a few lines from some already existing articles or webpages but would not say that the text was copied/pasted. Can you please help me understand if there are any issues regarding my recent contributions, please? Thank you again. Earthianyogi (talk) 15:41, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Earthianyogi. There was an issue with Draft:Reza Razavi where there was some material that was a match for material that had previously been published online. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. The web pages in the bot report are no longer extant, but the same text is present at https://www.kcl.ac.uk/people/reza-razavi. You removed the material yourself in a subsequent edit.— Diannaa (talk) 16:23, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa: Thanks, I must have realised something and therefore, must have edited it accordingly. Do I need to make any changes at present in regards to Draft:Reza Razavi? Earthianyogi (talk) 17:33, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

I have checked the draft using https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios, and the current version looks okay from a copyright point of view.— Diannaa (talk) 17:51, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello - about your message...

Barthel Bruyn the Elder

Hello, im ver sorry about this, but ill never added anything that wasn't on public display. Infact i always put the bibliography on every single thing i add to avoid this. About this article about bruyn the elder. https://www.museothyssen.org/en/collection/artists/bruyn-bartholomaus there is all the information and even if it was from there and i put the citation i didn't translate literal from it, i re order the information. FydelJ (talk) 16:29, 8 June 2020 (UTC) I would like to know what happened to correct the error, because till now i really don't understand. Thnxs fydel FydelJ (talk) 20:13, 8 June 2020 (UTC)

"On public display" is not the same thing as "in the public domain". The source web page is marked as copyright ("©2020 Thyssen-Bornemisza National Museum"), which means it's not okay to copy it to Wikipedia. Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. You can use the website as a source of information, but the text you add has to be written on your own words - not copied.— Diannaa (talk) 13:10, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

How much is 'fair use'?

Could you have a glance at this diff, please? The extract seems a little long to me, it is not there to support original text. The source is fairly old (1949) but it seems unlikely that the author is dead > 70 years. Thanks! [message to self: learn again about how to do diffs properly!] --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 11:49, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

It seems a bit long considering the article is a wee stub.— Diannaa (talk) 13:05, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Compare

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T255012
Resolved

I've noticed that the "compare" option in CopyPatrol doesn't seem to be working. Do you know if this has been reported?--S Philbrick (Talk) 12:06, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

I didn't realize it was broken, since I don't use that feature. As far as I know it has not been reported yet.— Diannaa (talk) 13:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Sphilbrick, I also noticed that; the text "An unknown error occurred when loading results. Please try again." appears. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 00:17, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Moneytrees, I agree, but trying again doesn't seem to help. S Philbrick (Talk) 11:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

I've opened a Phabricator ticket: phab:T255012— Diannaa (talk) 12:00, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks

I'm extendin' my extreme gratitude for your decent advice. SHISHIR DUA (talk) 16:16, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Goebbels edit

I added what I thought was a useful note to the Joseph Goebbels entry: that his name in German is spelled Goebbels and not, as many Anglophones might assume, Göbbels. 'oe' is a common substitution for 'ö' using an English keyboard. I don't think that such a truism needs a reference so I am at a loss to understand your removal (6 April 2020) of this piece of (IMO) useful information. I'm not interested in getting into an edit war. Please let me know your reasoning. I am not in the habit of removing information which is both true and relevant. If a citation is lacking I occasionally add one, or else call it to the editor's attention. I remove information only if it is untrue or irrelevant.Cross Reference (talk) 18:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

It's a Good Article, and everything else in the article has a citation. Please don't re-add the material unless you can source it. — Diannaa (talk) 18:41, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

What needs a citation? How his name is spelled? I will assume that you mean the information that the German ö is often substituted with a oe. Wikipedia's entry on Ö includes this paragraph: "In other languages that do not have the letter as part of the regular alphabet or in limited character sets such as ASCII, o-umlaut is frequently replaced with the digraph oe. For example, in German hören (hear/listen) can be easily recognized even if spelled hoeren.[citation needed]". Indeed it says "Citation needed" and has done since 2016. The editor here decided that the information was useful but could use a citation. I in fact disagree -- some things are obvious and well known and do not need to be referenced: but regardless, the editor did not delete the information. That I think was the right approach. Cross Reference (talk) 19:29, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't agree that including unsourced information in a Good Article is acceptable. If it was present at the time of my Good Article nomination, the reviewer would likely ask me to remove it: it's unsourced, possibly original research, and off-topic.— Diannaa (talk) 23:59, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

That has not been shown to be an issue of contention, the spelling of his name. In addition, I agree with Diannaa if that had been something shown to be relevant, it would have been raised by a RS historian and RS cited. Kierzek (talk) 02:38, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

From Verifiability: "In some cases, editors may object if you remove material without giving them time to provide references; consider adding a citation needed tag as an interim step.[4] When tagging or removing material for lacking an inline citation, please state your concern that it may not be possible to find a published reliable source and the material therefore may not be verifiable.[5] If you think the material is verifiable, you are encouraged to provide an inline citation yourself before considering whether to remove or tag it." I really doubt that a citation is needed for something which is so obviously known. Nevertheless I can add one. But I think a valid action from you might have been to add a citation yourself (something I have often done) or to add a 'citation needed' tag. I don't think deletion was an appropriate action here and it is not in accord with Wikipedia's guidelines. Cross Reference (talk) 04:29, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Regardless of the lack of citation, it's not a good addition. There's no need to tell our readers that we are not mis-spelling his name. Please don't re-add it.— Diannaa (talk) 12:35, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Persian Gulf National Day

greeting . what you have mentioned as copy right my addition to Persian Gulf National Day is not copyrighted material because in Iranian journal of tehrantimes mentioned that [17]

All Content by Mehr News Agency(tehran times) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2- this article had published in many public domains

3 - the material of that article is from the book that published in public domain and downloadable free .for example here in this public domain[18] so please return the edition back. 00:46, 10 June 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basp1 (talk • contribs)

I've re-added some of the content from the Tehran Times and added the required attribution as required by the terms of the CC-by license. Sorry for the mistake. The article is a mess, with duplicate and triplicate content, so I've marked it for copy edit. This link is not a book; it's a copy of the Tehran Times article.— Diannaa (talk) 12:28, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft Proposal: Copyright noticeboard

This is my draft proposal for the copyright noticeboard. Any suggestions/recommendations before I proceed?

In an attempt to restructure and rebuild the copyright cleanup area, I am proposing a general text copyright noticeboard, similar to the Conflict of interest noticeboard, the the blp noticeboard, and the Reliable source noticeboard. The board is different from the Media copyright questions board, and would focus instead on text. The board would be used to:

Discuss copypatrol reports
Handle issues where copyright is ambiguous such as a tricky G12, ambiguous mirrors, and difficult revdels
Provide a centralized place for questions relating to copyright
Report serial offenders for blocking
Coordinate CCI's and cleanup efforts
Centralize discussion so that text copyright issues aren't strewn about between Diannaa and Sphilbrick's talk pages, Copyright problems and it's talk, Contributor copyright investigations and its talk
Keep interest and users working in the area- the same small pool of editors won't work in it forever, so the board would hopefully draw new users.

The board would be called Wikipedia:Copyright noticeboard, with WP:CRN as a shortcut. It would be included in the Noticeboard links template. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 03:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Looks good. Just one concern: If you could please figure out a way to make it clear that the board will be for prose/text copyright issues only, as we already have one for images: Wikipedia:Media copyright questions— Diannaa (talk) 12:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Right, added. Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 16:42, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Missed one?

I'm not sure what the story was with Timeline of the 20th century, but you seem to have left the talk page deleted instead of restoring that too, just FYI. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 17:54, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Deacon Vorbis - good catch.— Diannaa (talk) 22:11, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

CODA Cognitive Architecture

Hi Diannaa, thanks for your feedback on the Draft:CODA Cognitive Architecture page. The arXiv publication you reference is published as CC-BY-SA. From what I understand, this means that the content is free to use, given that it is referenced correctly. Do you recommend that I edit the page with additional references / quotes? Or re-write it using different wording? Leenremm (talk) 13:38, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I carefully searched https://arxiv.org/pdf/2005.08603.pdf and could not find the license on the paper. Where is the license? Thanks.— Diannaa (talk) 13:58, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Diannaa. Maybe the OP is referring to this; a "CC BY 4.0" or "CC BY-SA 4.0" would be OK for Wikipedia, but that page also states that submitters can also choose a "CC BY-NC-SA 4.0" license, which wouldn't be OK for Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:09, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Two of the four licenses listed at https://arxiv.org/help/license are not compatible licenses. So we need to know the specific license for this specific document, and it needs to appear right on the document.— Diannaa (talk) 14:14, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

I agree with that assessment, and my apologies if it seemed as if I didn't. The licensing page states "We currently support three of the Creative Commons licenses. If you wish to use a different CC license, then select arXiv's non-exclusive license to distribute in the arXiv submission process and indicate the desired Creative Commons license in the actual article." and since one of the three (or two of the four) licenses they use are not OK for Wikipedia, it can't be assumed that the content itself is automatically licensed under the two OK licenses unless it's indicated as such directly on the document (which doesn't seem to be the case). -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:47, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

User:FaisalMusicFan99

Thank you for blocking the range 217.164.0.0/16 for "creating dozens of draft copies of extant articles"
These IPs are socks of User:FaisalMusicFan99 and I was preparing a post on these socks and articles, please see User:Arjayay/Albert#June_2020
As you can see from the rest of that page, I gave been following this vandal for some considerable time, and know their methods and targets fairly well.
As listed on that page, they have recently used other IPs in Abu Dhabi as well - I don't fully understand range blocks, but I suspect the 2.50 addresses are far too broad?
Could I, however, ask you to delete all the remaining draft articles for block evasion? - Thanks - Arjayay (talk) 15:01, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for doing all that research. Many of the drafts qualify for speedy deletion and if you could tag them as such I would appreciate it, as this would spread the work around among more people instead of placing the burden on one busy person (me). (I deleted a couple more of the unneeded drafts.) I checked the range block before applying it and I don't think it is too broad - it looks to me like pretty much all the recent activity has been this one person. I can always tweek it or shorten it if we start getting complaints.— Diannaa (talk) 15:18, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks - I don't mind tagging them, but it is usually easier to convince one person about 10 deletions, en-masse, than 10 people about one deletion each. There seems to be some confusion over the range block - you blocked 217.164.0.0/16 - I was asking about the 2.50 addresses listed at User:Arjayay/Albert#2020 - Thanks again - Arjayay (talk) 15:28, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

2.50.128.0/18. He hasn't used that range since May 24. Other people are on that range though. — Diannaa (talk) 11:24, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Copyright breaches from Responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in May 2020

Hi Diannaa. Many thanks for drawing these potential copyright breaches to my attention in regards to recent edits I made. I haven't edited in a while and was referring to these pages for a project until I became aware of how outdated the articles were, so I'm a bit rusty on all the copyrighting, although I can assure you nothing was done deliberately, and I have since returned to my edits and changed the wording whilst consulting a variety of articles to remove potential breaches. Please let me know if my edits still fall short of copyright breaches and I will consider an appropriate course of action ASAP. Could I gently ask that you please don't remove entire sections relating to a particular country's measures (e.g. I noticed that the section from 13 May about travel restrictions eased by Iceland was removed completely) as I would be happy to alter this from the original article, and I feel that the information is relevant. Hopefully we can get this group of pages up-to-date soon, and apologies if I've wasted your time a bit with what one might consider to be 'rookie' mistakes! 😀 Thanks once again for bringing this up, and I hope that I've helped to resolve the issue to an acceptable standard. MaxyPaxy2004 (talk) 15:34, 11 June 2020 (UTC) 🇬🇧

I am done cleaning the article. Text I removed is still visible in the page history for the time being. Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia, not even if you are in a hurry or think the importance of the topic outweighs the need to follow Wikipedia's copyright policy. Because it doesn't. — Diannaa (talk) 20:03, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you once again for bringing this to my attention. I'm fully aware of the copyright policy here, and the mistakes made were simply just mistakes; I absolutely was not trying to cut corners to save time. I will proceed to edit with more caution in the future, and I hope you can appreciate that I have taken steps to amend my own errors. MaxyPaxy2004 (talk) 20:40, 11 June 2020 (UTC) 🇬🇧

Can you please help me in changing the name of a template?

Mistakenly, I created a template with wrong name. So please can you help me in renaming of the template? Current Name: commons:Template:Institution=ADDITIONAL DIRECTORATE GENERAL OF PUBLIC INFORMATION (ADG PI), Indian Army

To be Renamed with Additional Directorate General of Public Information (ADG PI), Indian Army.

The template is on Wikimedia Commons.

Thank You. Mangalam Agrawal (talk) 16:43, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Another copyright question (sorry)!

I requested revdel on Draft:The_Case_against_Reality_by_Donald_Hoffman as a large portion of it was copied from a Goodreads review. The author stated on my talk page that they are the author of the Goodreads review, and wanted to know if it would be okay to use the content if they deleted the review on Goodreads (see see User_talk:Spicy#Copyright_review_Hoffman_book. I'm not sure if this is kosher from a copyright perspective since I would assume the Goodreads page will have been cached and mirrored on various sites, so I'd like to get your take on it. (P.S. I support Moneytrees' proposal for a noticeboard for questions like this so I don't have to bother you all the time :P) Thanks, Spicy (talk) 20:10, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Deleting text from the Internet does not change its copyright status. It's still copyright, and a copy exists on the Wayback Machine. "The Internet is forever" — Diannaa (talk) 20:20, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Revdel

Hello! all the versions contained in this diff seem to have some degree of copyvio leading up to this 98% Earwig result. Thanks. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:57, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 11:25, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Diana.

First of all, I hope you're fine, safe and hearlthy.

I would like to clarify an issue with In-Grid's bio page. I realized that some info I wrote was deleted, I read you provided a link arguing copyright, but in fact, I'm the author of that info, the artist asked to me many years ago for using it and I was agree. I've tried many times to put it on wiki's, even with a book where I took the original info as the main reference, but was deleted. Do I have to provide any document signed for proving it I wrote this information many years ago? Let me know, because I would like to put this real info with no mistakes that some official sites are providing.

Best regards, Miguel Flores

In-Grid. We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa (talk) 11:29, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Please review my draft: President's Colour Award.

Hello Dianaa, I request you to please review my draft on the President's Colour Award and help to publish it fast. Mangalam Agrawal (talk) 10:02, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have time to review drafts. You will have to wait your turn.— Diannaa (talk) 11:15, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Nower Hill High School

Please see possible copyvio [19] from [20]. Best wishes.SovalValtos (talk) 13:06, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Done Thanks for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 23:36, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Grumman sport boat

Hi Diannaa, could you look at Grumman sport boat? It has the look of a word for word copy of something, but I'm not sure of what. All I can find online are Wiki mirrors. It might also be specifically written for Wikipedia by the person who "signed" it at the end, but it's encyclopedic. The topic is probably notable, but this article should.probably be blown up. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:54, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

I can't find a match for that prose either (other than the Wiki mirrors). I spot-checked snippet view of the book he mentions ("The Outboard Boater's Handbook: Advanced Seamanship and Practical Skills") and found nothing.— Diannaa (talk) 23:36, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. - BilCat (talk) 23:41, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Regarding Assessment Rating

Hi Diannaa, can you please help me in getting assessment ratings to these articles, Madhvacharya, Narayanacharya, Krishnacharya Tamanacharya Pandurangi, Satyadhyana Tirtha, Vidyadhisha Tirtha, Raghuttama Tirtha, Satyatma Tirtha, Sripadaraja, Raghavendra Tirtha, Vadiraja Tirtha and Uttaradi Math, Thanks - MRRaja001 (talk) 07:03, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

All of these articles area already assessed and labelled as start-class. If you think these ratings need to be updated, please ask at one of the relevant wikiprojects such as Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Assessment.— Diannaa (talk) 12:06, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay, Thank you - MRRaja001 (talk) 15:30, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

Carl Grassfield this user is reverting my edits on airline articles my edits were accepted by other users needed immediate action on him Ktdk (talk) 11:34, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Battle of Manzikert

There is a dispute on that article on the copyright of a picture. Can you take a look? Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:07, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Ktrimi's restoration of obviously copyvio picture

Hi Dianna. I hope you are well. Sorry for the disturbance, but Ktrimi991 is persistently edit-warring, at Battle of Manzikert‎ (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), an obvious copyvio picture (File:Manzikert.jpg) which was tagged for deletion at Commons by a Wikipedia admin since 6 June 2020. Can you please give them a warning? Thank you. Dr. K. 14:13, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Can you read the section above? Can you also give a proper explanation of your concerns instead of edit summaries with personal attacks about supposed "stalking"? Also why did you ask the admin to give me a warning, instead of asking them to explain the situation with their own words and links to relevant policies? Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:17, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I hadn't seen your section, but this is irrelevant. I have explained the situation more than adequately to Dianna. The picture is an obvious copyvio. If you don't understand that and engage in reflexive edit-warring trying to add it back to a GA article despite my warning on your talk and my edit-summaries, you need a warning. As far as stalking, you followed Khirurg to the article and started reverting. This is not the first time you have done that. Dr. K. 14:23, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

The pic was there when the article's GA status was reviewed last year. On Commons, the pic was nominated 8 days ago and it has not been deleted yet. In other words, until an admin makes a conclusion on the issue, I will not trust an editor who resorts to personal attacks and edit warring. Again, prove your silly "stalking" claims. Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:27, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Or better, go to AE and talk about the supposed "stalking" me, and at least two other editors, are doing to you, based on your own claims. Why do not you go there? Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:30, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Let's wait for Dianna's opinion on the obvious copyvio in the face of your clueless arguments. As far as the opportunistic edit-warring hounding of Khirurg, that's a separate and unrelated issue. Hopefully, it will be dealt with soon, but here, on Dianna's talk, is not the place to discuss it. Dr. K. 14:43, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

It is an usual practice for you to accuse other editors of "hounding" and "stalking". Indeed, if you repeat it without evidence at AE, it will be properly dealt with. Ktrimi991 (talk) 14:47, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

It is usual practice for you to attempt to threaten and intimidate editors using vile edit-summaries. Here is an example. An attack so vile, it elicited a later query from an uninvolved editor. You are a known quantity, Ktrimi, so don't waste your time trying to intimidate me. Dr. K. 15:09, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

The meaning of the edit summary was that an editor who keeps unconstructive behaviour does not have a good future on Wiki, unless they reflect. The editor who made the "query" had just been criticized by me for making personal attacks against another editor, and later apprently linked me and other editors with "Axis". Instead of those kind of reactions, why do not you mention ones that attracted reaction by admins [21]? Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:22, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

ones that attracted reaction by admins That's a lame, weasel WP:ASPERSION. It was in response to your cohort's remark, insinuating that Greek editors create a jungle atmosphere for newbies, the infamous Welcome to the jungle newbie, an insulting and base remark directed at me and Khirurg. It has been explained to death, but you leveled this weasel accusation without providing an honest context. Par for the course for you. Dr. K. 16:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

The comment you were responding to there was not made by me. The admin criticized your comment only, not the other editor's. And these are not the only examples of you making personal attacks. My last comment here, I prefer to focus on building an encyclopedia rather than to respond to silly accusations of "stalking". Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:11, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

If by building an encyclopedia you mean rapid-fire edit-warring copyvio pictures in GA articles, I suggest to you to cease and desist from such activities. As far as your added weasel insinuations, I already replied to you before so I won't repeat myself. Dr. K. 16:16, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay in replying. It's not a photo of a diorama; it's a colored drawing or lithograph. I found the image is a stock image https://www.123rf.com/photo_32831270_battle-of-manzikert-1071-ce-askeri-military-museum-in-istanbul-turkey.html, where it is available in resolutions of up to 9000 x 6000. Here it is on Pinterest in a pin dated March 2016. So I don't think you should be including it. I will post at the deletion nomination. Deletion nominations on Commons usually stay open for a minimum of one week so 8 days is hardly anything definitive about the future of the image.— Diannaa (talk) 15:30, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your response, and sorry for the many talk page notifications you received. I wanted a clarification by an admin, as the pic had been there during a GA review process, that seems to have missed the copyright thing. Cheers, Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:39, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I have visited the Askeri Muze in Istanbul. The picture is a photo of a diorama: full view The other pictures are different photos of the same object. If you examine them in photoshop or similar software, you will find out that they have different primary shadows/lighting attributes. The stock image has undergone professional shadows/adjustment correction, but it is a photograph. IMO the image shouldn't be removed before the nomination concludes.--Maleschreiber (talk) 15:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Your opinion is irrelevant. We don't use copyvio pictures on Wikipedia, or pictures of uncertain or disputed copyright status. It's just plain WP:COMMONSENSE. Dr. K. 16:10, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Dianna and sorry for the unrelated responses due to the irrelevant issues raised by the copyvio, rapid-fire edit-warrior on your talk. Dr. K. 16:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Maleschreiber I have added your information to the Commons deletion nomination.— Diannaa (talk) 16:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

There are several photos from two particular dioramas in wikicommons [22]. Maybe they should be put in a separate sub-category after the nominations end. Do the photos create a new copyright or is there a country-specific policy? I remember that one of the assistant curators in the museum told us that use of photos of specific objects in the museum is free for non-commercial purposes.--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:38, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

I remember that one of the assistant curators in the museum told us that use of photos of specific objects in the museum is free for non-commercial purposes. = Licence incompatible with the free licences at Commons. Dr. K. 09:25, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi again Dianna. I just noticed that you struck your delete !vote at commons although the link you provided from the Istanbul museum specifies that "© 2012-2020 INTERNATIONAL PANORAMA COUNCIL". Is there a reason for the striking of your !vote? Thank you. Dr. K. 23:39, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Dr.K.: I struck my vote because the photo I found is not identical to the one at the Commons and for additional reasons discussed below. @Maleschreiber: There's a couple issues here. Firstly, if the artwork is three-dimensional, the photo and the artwork can potentially be protected by copyright; each could be licensed differently. See commons:Commons:When to use the PD-Art tag#When should the PD-Art tag not be used? And secondly, freedom of panorama. In most countries, three-dimensional artwork such as sculptures and even buildings are copyright, and it's not okay to publish photographs of them without permission of the copyright holder. Rules vary by country. See commons:Commons:Freedom of panorama for general information and commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Turkey#Freedom of panorama for Turkey. The wording is not clear as to whether or not works on permanent display indoors are protected by copyright. So I don't feel comfortable casting a vote on whether or not the image should be deleted.— Diannaa (talk) 12:09, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

The point you raise about dimensionality is very interesting, because in Turkey it increases the validity of claim of a personal copyright. So, Turkish copyright law promulgates that a photo ("reproduction") of an object, if it has "aesthetic value" (very broadly defined), is defined as work and its copyright holder is the photographer. In addition to that, Turkey has quite liberal copyright laws concerning non-commercial use: Reproducing all intellectual and artistic works for personal use without pursuing profit is permitted.--Maleschreiber (talk) 16:09, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Reproducing all intellectual and artistic works for personal use without pursuing profit is permitted.: How many times, and in which different ways do I have to repeat to you that this very licence that you italicise and I quote from your post just above, is incompatible with the free licences used in Wikipedia and Commons which specifically stipulate that they are free for any use, including commercial? Dr. K. 04:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

Carl Grassfield this user is reverting my edits on airline articles my edits were accepted by other users needed immediate action on him . Ktdk (talk) 14:48, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020

Hi, Diannaa Carl Grass field is always reverting my edits on KLM fleet Air Canada fleet and All Nippon airways fleet though the other users accepting my edits only this user disagrees with my edits on these pages need immediate action on him Ktdk (talk) 14:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

If you do an undiscussed change and someone objects, you need to talk to them. Not me— Diannaa (talk) 15:31, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Revision deletion

Responding to a request for revision deletion of Engineering technologist I have spent some time investigating and have come to the conclusion that this blog seems to have copied Wikipedia rather than the other way round. The text I looked at has been in the article since at least 2012, and the blog is possibly 2013 or 2017. I have made a mess of trying to sort it out and with your experience, you will know what to do! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:39, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

The blog is dated January 2017 at which point we already had the text. Earwig's tool shows a 99.5% match with the last revision from 2016. So revision deletion is not needed. The blog is a Wikipedia mirror.— Diannaa (talk) 12:26, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:13, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Ali Love

Hi Diannaa thank you for interested in this page . as you see i eddted lots of infomation about Ali love (alexander peter williams ) page, . he is my bf and i did it instead of him. all the info is confirm from Ali love. these all senstence are also wroten by his agency .so i dont think its problem exit in this page i dont understand why you keep delete and edit so very confusing... want to know if i something wrong let me know what is right way to keep all infomation rather before delete all. thank you for your kindness xx

Since the text you want to add has been previously published elsewhere online, we can't accept it here unless the copyright holder gives written permission. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa (talk) 12:20, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Adam_Watts_(musician)

Hi, I have deleted extensive quotes that seem to have been in the article for a while, so I don't know who added them. Please could you revision delete the copied material? Let me know if I deleted anything in error. TSventon (talk) 08:40, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

We don't do revision deletion for excessive quotations. It's not a violation of the copyright policy.— Diannaa (talk) 12:23, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, that's useful to know. TSventon (talk) 22:00, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Question on Challenging editor...

Hi Diannaa. I was hoping to get a bit of advice. I've contributed significantly to the page Boris Skossyreff as part of a project; it has been improved to the extent that I've nominated it for GA status. I've begun having issues with another editor who is making destructive and unsubstantiated edits, and is writing quite aggressive edit summaries. These include "yes, you deliberately do it... you are a fraud", "do you just do vague Google Books searches and throw things in at random? nothing checks out here!" and "another fraud: the quote appears in neither source". Each of the sources chosen very clearly relate to the sentence before, so I am unsure as to what the editor is referring to. I've already tried resolving the conflict by trying to work with the editor in question, but they've gone right back to non-constructive editing. I've left a notice on their talk page about how the page was up for GA nom, and that destructive editing would not be appreciated. The response was "your fraud will be exposed".

It seems from his talk page that the editor has been in quite a few conflicts. His block log contains 4 blocks for disruptive editing & personal attacks. I'm quite unsure as to what to do, as I was hoping to get this quite interesting article to GA, and the constant implication that I am a "fraud" is not appreciated. I apologise for the quite long question, but do you have any suggestions?

Many thanks, SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 15:49, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

They are being rude. But I can't find anywhere that you've discussed the problem with the other editor first before seeking admin help. This is a first step in resolving a dispute. (There's two parts to the dispute: their rudeness, and the content dispute.) But checking a couple of the edits:

Diff of Boris Skossyreff: I can't find anything on the topic of sports on page 155 of that book. I can't access the other source.
Diff of Boris Skossyreff: Neither source supports the preceding prose.— Diannaa (talk) 16:17, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. I tried discussing on their talk page, and worked through various issued (while trying to be polite and avoid edit warring – (a fail on the GA checklist). I left the note earlier on their tone of summary, but they've continued editing. I just received a note that the editor had added a section on the article's talk page that was titled "Fraudulent editor" (I have since changed this to "A note on Edit-Warring". Apologies for the source above – the quote had been in the page before I started editing it. The top of page 156 states '...of the press, and free public education for all. Boris's subjects would be encouraged to participate in sports'. Best, SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 16:55, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

My opinion is that if you are nominating for GA, you are responsible for all the content, top to bottom. If you didn't enter the quote or add the citations, then whomever added the content and the bad cites should be spoken to about them, not you. The Arbitration Committee is the last stop for dispute resolution, not the first. They won't accept a case until other methods of dispute resolution have been attempted, and they don't resolve content disputes or minor behavioral issues. Please see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution for dispute resolution steps. — Diannaa (talk) 17:04, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

If your edit is challenged, your first step should be to visit the article's talk page to discuss. Not to reinstate the edit. See WP:BRD for more info on this topic. Reinstating content if you have not actually checked to see if the citations support the addition is a really bad idea. — Diannaa (talk) 17:05, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for that Diannaa. I'll give that a try. How should I go about stopping the slander (mainly the repeated referral to me as 'a fraud')? Thanks for your help! SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 17:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I've left a message on their talk page advising to stop doing that, and to proceed to the article talk page to discuss their concerns.— Diannaa (talk) 17:34, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help! It's been much appreciated. SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 18:00, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi again Diannaa. I’ve tried offering out an olive branch to the user on their talk page, offering to start on a clean slate and collaberate, but it’s been completely knocked down by the user. After your message, they’ve again posted slander on the article talk page including “since you're stupid enough to…” and refusing to take the comment down after I've asked respectfully. I’m what Wiki would describe as a “Younger editor”, and don’t believe that that has hindered my article publication – albeit I have had to learn my way around various rules and regs. I have an accepted GA, and two nominations (I’ve also been quite active in reducing the GA backlog). I must admit that I’m not too comfortable with the user’s repeated tone, nor accusations, nor refusal to move on… Best - SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 20:16, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't usually deal with behavioural issues so I don't actually know much about how to handle this. I've issued them another warning.— Diannaa (talk) 11:59, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

About copy right violation on wiki page: Violin Sonata No. 24 (Mozart)

@Diannaa:Hi Diannaa, this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violin_Sonata_No._24_(Mozart) that I created was marked as a potential copy right violation. After seeing that, I had significantly changed the phrasing of the page. However, moments later, it still ended up in the deletion log. Would you please inform me where and how I had violated copy rights? Thank you very much.--Thomas M. (talk) 22:45, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

The initial version of the page contained content copied from AllMusic. That one revision of the page was hidden under our Wikipedia:Revision deletion policy.— Diannaa (talk) 11:34, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Sorry I first thought that it was the entire page. I'm quite a new user.--Thomas M. (talk) 12:54, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Revdel

hello! Some revdel is required on the material I removed in the latest edit to Valentin Khrushch. I discovered but do not have time at the moment to correct some more on Vasiliy Ryabchenko. Do you have a magic wand for finding all the instances? The editor who added the material (looks like it was mostly done in 2017) has been advised not to do this. Thank you as always. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 01:06, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

There's no magic involved - it's Earwig's copyvio detector. I don't see anything further that needs cleaning. Thanks for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 11:36, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Ugo Giletta page

Dear Diannaa, I have a question to ask. I saw that he put a note on the "Ugo Giletta" page I'm writing: This was translated from it: Ugo Giletta. Could this be a problem for a possible publication? I created the Ugo Giletta page in Italian and now with the same text I would like to create the same thing on English Wikipedia. Thanks for your attention. Cordially --Arte frida (talk) 10:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

It's not a barrier to publication.— Diannaa (talk) 11:43, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification--Arte frida (talk) 13:24, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Would you be so kind as to explain the copyvio removal message regarding article Crockett, California?

I received a Wikipedia message from your userid saying my recent edits of the article Crockett California were removed for possible copyvio. Kindly explain if this was a bot-initiated or bot-managed removal. If on the other hand, it was a human edit, please explain. If this is your removal, I request reversing it. I believe there was no copyright violation. The editing was done by a human (me) using mostly my own words, with use of facts from a published reference work, without direct quotations. If there was a bot-source text match, I would like to know what that text is. This is especially upsetting because the published reference work is a local history not likely to be archived on the internet. Perhaps there is another reason I am not guessing. I protest the removal for a suspected copyvio, and request explanation. With warm regards, IsacLee Isaclee (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found. The content is also visible at http://www.cocohistory.com/essays-sugarwars.html in addition to the website noted in the bot report. — Diannaa (talk) 22:21, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

June 2020 (2)

Hello Diannaa.

In regards to the message you left on my talk page about Ministry of Education, Heritage and Arts (Fiji), could you kindly review and check it as I've summarised the section in my own words. I've also added new information with citations to reliable sources. Thanks for reminding.

Thanks again. Atau (talk) 23:59, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that is much better. Thank you for taking the time to do that.— Diannaa (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Message from Eehdeidhied

Hello Dianaa. In regards to the message you left on my talk page about Bishop's College School, I have created another page for the alumni and will fix the problems you mentioned by steps. Thanks for the notice.--Eehdeidhied (talk) 00:24, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Quote on Laws

Hi Diannaa.. just quick question, is it allowed to quote entire words of certain law on the article. For example: Wikipedia Act (1, 1). Parliament of Wikipedia. 2020. Everyone is free to edit (assuming Wikipedia is sovereign country)
So, on the article, can we put

Article 1 of Wikipedia Act stated that "Everyone is free to edit", or
According to Article 1 of Wikipedia Act, "Everyone is free to edit", or
Based on the law, "Everyone is free to edit" <ref>{{cite act|article=1|title=Wikipedia Act|index=1|year=2020|quote=Everyone is free to edit}}</ref>, or

we need to paraphrase, such as:

Refer to the law, no-one shall be refrain from editing article <ref>{{cite act|article=1|title=Wikipedia Act|index=1|year=2020|quote=Everyone is free to edit}}</ref>, or

I believe that laws are all public domain, but just want to have clarification. Thank you.Ckfasdf (talk) 03:27, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Not all laws are public domain. Government works (including laws) are copyright in many countries. For example, in India, government works including legislation enjoy copyright protection for 60 years from publication date; in Canada it's 50 years. There's information on most countries at Commons:Copyright rules by territory. It's okay to use short properly attributed quotations.— Diannaa (talk) 13:58, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

I have look up on Commons:Copyright rules by territory, and the copyright law of country that I intended to quote said government work is not protected by copyright. So, it should be OK to quote entire law as the example above. Thank you. Ckfasdf (talk) 22:41, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Talk:VERITAS_(spacecraft)

Hi Diannaa, would you be willing to take a look at the edit request I put up on the Talk:VERITAS_(spacecraft) page? I'm requesting reordering of information on the page, updates to sources, and a significant rewrite to the VERITAS Objectives and Goals section. I am hoping all the changes I suggested are implementable. If they are, would you be able to help implement the edits? If they are not, it would be great to get your feedback on what I can do to make the edits more acceptable. Thanks for your time! Morgensteorra (talk) 03:49, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

There's people who specialize in edit requests, it's best to wait for one of them to help.— Diannaa (talk) 16:01, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay, good to know. Thank you! Morgensteorra (talk) 18:38, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

2009 in film

Hi Diannaa, I know you usually deal with copyvios. I came across 2009 in film#Evaluation of the year today which appears to be a cut and paste of this article. All the best. Betty Logan (talk) 18:37, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

It's a quotation, not a copyright violation per se, but it's a lot of non-free content, so I am going to take it out on that basis.— Diannaa (talk) 19:32, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Template:Translation attribution shell

Hi Diannaa, just a heads-up about a new template that may be of interest to you, regarding translation attribution: {{Translation attribution shell}}. It is a collapsible container for multiple {{Translated page}} templates. (Various alternative names are available as redirects.) For an example of usage in the wild, see Talk:Clandestine press of the French Resistance. Cheers, Mathglot (talk) 22:50, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks— Diannaa (talk) 11:36, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Revised content: CODA Cognitive Architecture

Hi Dianna,

As requested I have revised the content for this article, re-writing the content and generating new images. This content is now different from the referenced material. Kindly review and let me know if you suggest any further changes. URL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:CODA_Cognitive_Architecture. Leenremm (talk) 04:30, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

The current version looks okay from a copyright point of view. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 11:37, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Rowland Laugharne: Query Removal of Cited Source for Current Content

Hi Dianna,

Sorry about that, the offending text has now been removed and the passage reworked restoring some earlier content which was a collateral casualty of your edit.Sirjohnperrot (talk) 13:25, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

I've just discovered that you have also removed the source cited for my revisions as they now currently remain - please see below

(not cur prev 12:30, 23 June 2020‎ Diannaa talk contribs‎ 14,897 bytes -2,214‎: remove copyright content copied from http://battlefields.rcahmw.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/Laugharne-sieges-Gildas-2013.pdf - not released under a compatible license thank:

May I ask on what grounds and under which Wikipedia policy that citations to this site and its internal links are not permitted? Sirjohnperrot (talk) 07:28, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Look in the lower right corner - you will see a link "Non-commercial Government Licence". Clicking on that link reveals that the content cannot be used for commercial purposes. That's not a compatible license, because Wikipedia's license permits all uses, including commercial uses and advertising.— Diannaa (talk) 11:54, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Sony E-Mount LA-EB Adapters

Sorry for copying the sony page, but we could have reworked the edit to fit wikipedia standards rather than delete it all.Apha9 (talk) 15:16, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Apha9, (talk page stalker) I didn't look at the edit in question but I do handle a lot of copyright issues, and I am very aware that it may look rude to delete it all rather than to identify the problem and fix it. However, there are a very small number of volunteers who take on the generally thankless task of investigating the reported copyright issues, and there are literally hundreds of reports every week, so as much as it would be easier on you if we spent a lot of extra time trying to reword the content, given the volume of reports and the number of volunteers that's just not a feasible option. Your willingness to volunteer to help improve Wikipedia is appreciated; I guarantee that if you stick around for a couple years and get involved in copyright issues, you will have a deeper appreciation of why it was handled this way. S Philbrick (Talk) 19:20, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay will impove for next timeApha9 (talk) 19:38, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Reason to delete Shu-Liang Bob Wu biograghy

Dear Diannaa,

I found that my biography "Dr. Shu-Liang Bob Wu" has been deleted by you with the reason which the article copy the following webs

https://rocafes.blogspot.com/2019/08/ (TW)）

I did write that article with Chinese in 2019. I have the right to copy or redirect the article to any places I want. the reference that I put in is the public record in UCLA Ph.D dissertation. Is any reason that the reference can not find?

Please reinstate my article. Thank you very much.

Shu-Liang Bob Wu, Ph.D, 06-26-2020

We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa (talk) 20:07, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the phabricator report

I have house guests for the weekend, so haven't been paying close attention, but I did notice that there seemed to be a lack of new reports.--S Philbrick (Talk) 19:12, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

MusikAnimal is already working on it but I decided to file a ticket anyway, to hopefully get more help and a fast resolution.— Diannaa (talk) 20:06, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

We are all caught up as of now, so here's a chance to work on other tasks and feel refreshed by doing so. — Diannaa (talk) 20:09, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Shirabad Waterfall

I have deleted the Shirabad Waterfalls section which was apparently copied from https://www.itto.org/iran/attraction/shirabad-waterfall-khanbebin-golestan/ on 6 November 2019‎ by an editor who is no longer active.

Please could you revision delete the copied material. TSventon (talk) 22:04, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 23:57, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

War of 1812

The statement isn't copied; it's a close paraphrase that was intended to be an indirect quote of the cited material. If it's too close though, I will work on either rephrasing it or quoting it directly. Elinruby (talk) 15:54, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

It's pretty identical. Please see the bot report (click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap). That's not okay.— Diannaa (talk) 16:06, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I just went in to address this and the text I thought we were talking about is still there. Is the removed text this part here, as it appears from the diff?

" After 1814 the natives, who lost most of their fur-gathering territory, became an undesirable burden to British policymakers. The latter now looked to the United States for markets and raw materials.^[1] The United States further disrupted trade along the northern border by prohibiting British fur traders from operating in the US, whereas before the war, both populations had freely moved back and forth across the border"?

References

^ Calloway 1986, pp. 1–20.

If so, I did not write that, and don't know who did. I thought we were talking about the text I added about the treaties, which is indeed from PBS, but that's still there. The bot may need retraining? But I know you have been doing copyvio stuff for a while, so the confusion is probably mine, but please explain. Elinruby (talk) 18:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

PS, I did *edit* that text yesterday. I remember changing fur-gathering to fur-trapping, and adding a wikilink, plus some linguistic quibbles. That may be why it's only a 75% match. But anyway, if in fact the issue is with the PBS text, let me know and I will make it just a direct quote, because I think that needs to be in the article. Elinruby (talk) 18:16, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I've undone the revision deletion so we can have a closer look. This is the edit that the bot reported. It's definitely your addition and not something that was already present in the article and it's not something that is still in the article. This is the edit where I removed the overlapping content. The text that was copied was But Tecumseh was mortally wounded, and his death and defeat marked the end of the native campaign to drive back white settlers. On a larger scale, the American victory cleared the way for the U.S. claim to the native interior of North America with more treaty negotiations following, resulting in numerous removals of most of the eastern woodland Indian communities to the west. It's the same as that identified by the bot and the same that I removed.— Diannaa (talk) 18:41, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I wikilinked eastern woodland, did something with "to the west", possibly changed it to "westward" and laughed sarcastically at "negotiations". I believe I deleted it and changed "treaty" to treaties. Incidentally, I never use that reference format, which I hate with a passion. The text can completely go away as far as I am concerned. I find the tone of self-congratulation offensive, am editing the article for this sort of NPOV pushing, and considered deleting the whole thing as repetitive, since the article says this over and over again. Please do delete, in fact. The text I wanted to include is the one with the PBS reference. Meanwhile please let me know if I can assist you with this. Elinruby (talk) 04:37, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

I can't do it right now but I have decided to make the text I added a direct quote. The bot does appear to be somehow confused but I can't rule out that it may in fact be talking about my paraphrase from the PBS citation, and I want those facts in the article. I will take care of this this evening Pacific time. Meanwhile I am somewhat curious and would appreciate if you would let me know what you find out. Elinruby (talk) 16:04, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

I thought I already answered your question. So I guess I don't know what your question is.— Diannaa (talk) 19:07, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

I can't remember!

A new editor has asked me about copyright checking tools. In my Tools menu, left margin, I have Earwig's CVDetector (1). It was years ago that I imagine I deployed it. Or is it standard for all editors?

I'd love to tell them how to deploy it and I just plain have no idea! I just use it because I use it.

Just got back here after a few years break, and I remembered you know more than most folk about copyright issues, so I thought I'd ask. Please can you point me in the right direction? Fiddle Faddle 18:09, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Anybody can use this tool. It is currently located at https://copyvios.toolforge.org/. I can't find a documentation page or how-to guide for this tool.— Diannaa (talk) 18:49, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

PS: Welcome back.— Diannaa (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the info and the welcome back. Fiddle Faddle 20:22, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Revdel request

This edit is copy/pasted from this copyrighted source. - NitinMlk (talk) 19:35, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Done— Diannaa (talk) 20:57, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. - NitinMlk (talk) 21:00, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

COIs and draft articles

Hi Diannaa, do you know if COI editors that create or edit draft articles are under the same restrictions as those who edit in mainspace? The draft in question is at Draft:Airflow (company). It also appears to contain copyvios of this webpage. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 22:04, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

The copyvio has been deleted. - BilCat (talk) 23:42, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I am pretty sure COI and paid editors are under the same restrictions in draft space as they are in main space. I am not the best person to ask though. — Diannaa (talk) 10:51, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@BilCat: If I may hop in, I review at AFC (I've just returned to the addiction after a burnout break of some years) and am reasonably experienced. There are two topics here, COI and Copyvio. Of those Copyvio is treated identically in articles, sandboxen and drafts. It is shot on sight.

COI is accepted in drafts with declaration, even paid, up to but not beyond the point of acceptance. Part of WP:AFC's purpose has evolved to counter COI editors' attempts to force adverts on us. By reviewing and pushing their work back the process introduces some discipline. It seeks to force neutrality on the COI editor. Fiddle Faddle 11:41, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you. Tim, good to see you around again. (I took a few months off late last year due to burn-out also.) And yes, I realized there were two issues involved when I posted. :) - BilCat (talk) 19:25, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

@BilCat: you just let me realise I sounded slightly patronising over the two issues thing. My apologies. Fiddle Faddle 19:55, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Just a bit, but no worries. That's why I added the :) - BilCat (talk) 19:57, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission

Professor Ray has requested me to ask you, Diannaa, to contact him directly on his email to inform him of what he needs to do in terms of Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. His email address is: (Redacted)

PuedaHacer (talk) 22:55, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

I will not be corresponding directly with Ray. Here's what to ask him to do: follow the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent.— Diannaa (talk) 10:43, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help in advance

Dear Diannaa. First of all, thank you for your help. I have edited several wiki posts. Horacio Gutierrez' post has been vetted, edited multiple times, and approved for many years. Graywalls seems to continue to delete and find issues with the post even after the vetting and approval by multiple editors. My concern is that there may exist some inherent bias against Mr. Gutierrez (Hispanic) by trying to delete great pianist attribute. Many wiki posts of classical pianists contain the attribute. I am not sure if Graywalls is a colleague, or critic, or? One of my strengths in editing wikis is finding appropriate sources to document statements. I tried to resolve the current issue with additional references and citations. Mr. Gutierrez' career, body of work, discography, awards is well documented. If Graywalls deletes great pianist from his post, then there are many others he has left great pianist with lesser documentation as part of the wiki and not deleted. I consider myself a novice, but I am willing to help make every post better. Thank you for your help [[User:maryphillips1952|maryphillips1952] Maryphillips1952 (talk) 15:27, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for guidance for LAC info

Diannaa, thank you for your helpful edit and revision on the HC LAC page. I wasn't as aware of Wikipedia's guidelines around some information that fell under commercial use. In the upcoming days that section will be updated to be in compliance with the guidelines you sent me. LiberalArtsCollegeEditor (talk) 19:59, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Florence Rose

Hi @Diannaa: This seems to mostly copyvio although the references say it is public domain, but it has been copied wholesale without alteration. It almost all the same. scope_creep^Talk 22:01, 29 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi scope creep. The article contains material from a webpage that is released under a compatible license. It's okay to copy it, as long as proper attribution is given, which it is.— Diannaa (talk) 10:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, Thanks for that. I wasn't sure. scope_creep^Talk 11:20, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

We've been getting quite a few of these lately that are sourced to the Smith College website, so watch out for that.— Diannaa (talk) 11:25, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Revdel request for a large-scale copyvio

Hi Dianna. We have a large-scale copyvio from http://www.thesecrettruth.com/obama.htm. The edit is here. Thank you. Dr. K. 00:58, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Dr.K.,

Done Moneytrees🌴^{Talk🌲Help out at CCI!} 01:22, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

@Moneytrees: Thank you very much, Moneytrees. Take care. Dr. K. 01:35, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Game of the century

I'll add the PGN without the comments. That way it will contain no extra information that is not already in the page. PS: Can you cite a source that says that comments on chess moves fall under copyright ? Garo (talk) 16:24, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind, i added it as a link to lichess. (But I still assume the comments are not copyrighted) Garo (talk) 16:44, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. Have a look at some of the links I placed on your talk page for more info.— Diannaa (talk) 18:52, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Pings

Hi, Diannaa - have you getting the pings regarding a copyvio? Please advise. ^Atsme _Talk 📧 20:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa - In this diff [23] ^Atsme asked Moneytrees to to rule/see if a partial transcript (in this diff [24]) of a person's 2015 answers & talk (of which no one seems to hold a copyright to), and was uploaded onto some random youtuber's channel, plus it was also reported in several other RS, is a copyvio. Moneytrees ruled/said it is not a copyvio [25] so I guess Atsme is wanting a 2nd opinion from you.

For background: as Atsme knows, the full-partial quote in question was never intended to go within the article and no editor ever intended youtube to the source for the article. The partial quote in question was introduced on a talk page solely as informational tool for Atsme so she could see with her own eyes and hear with her own ears that she was mistaken on some things.

Here's what I mean, Atsme had deleted an edit (which Beyond My Ken reverted here [26]) Among other things, that edit included info from that 2015 answer/talk session and whose source is an RS (not youtube). The deleted edit's RS provided partial quotes from the 2015 talk/answers but Atsme complained that the RS has a paywall so no information from that RS can be included. Other editors pointed out to Atsme that several, several other RS (roughly 16 RS) also reported the same/similar info from the same 2015 talk/questions. Atsme said none of those other RS can be used either due to: spin, clickbait, cherrypicking, opinion, & about 14 other allegations of WP violations. At one point, Atsme accused several, more than one, of the RS of basically being dishonest and claimed they "contain sensationalized clickbait opinion" so Atsme said those RS cannot be used. Atsme also said none of other sources can be used because, according to Atsme, they were reporting an "allegation in a single source that was repeated by other sources citing the original." Which took it full-circle because that "single source" is the original RS that Atsme said could not be used because of the paywall (much like the Wall Street Journal).

Because Atsme rejected all the other RSs (plural) and because Atsme had the incorrect impression that the RSs were repeating opinion, spin, allegations, clickbait, etc. To show Atsme proof that the RS are not reporting opinion, I put the partial quote on the talk page along with 4 sources: New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Politico, and some random person's youtube channel. But then, Atsme got concerned about copyvio so then asked Moneytrees to see if the partial quote is a copyvio and needed to be erased from the talk page. Moneytrees said no violation so did not erase the quote.

I understand why Atsme may want a 2nd opinion, but at the same time I feel this is kind of silly since Atsme also knows full well that the partial quote was not intended to go inside the article and was only put on the talk page as an informational tool so Atsme could see/hear factual information since Atsme had rejected all the other sources. If you disagree with Moneytrees and find it is copyvio, so be it. My question though would be this: since the original paywall RS printed parts of that partial quote and so did roughly 16 additional RS, would it be copyvio to put those parts of the partial quote on the talk page so Atsme can have the proof needed showing the deleted edit is not "allegations, spin, cherrypicking, sensationalized click bait." BetsyRMadison (talk) 21:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Atsme, I am not interested in getting involved on this issue.— Diannaa (talk) 21:49, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

[FOOTNOTECalloway19861–20-1] Calloway 1986, pp. 1–20.

[1]

Frank W. Caldwell

You've got mail!

Speedy deletion nomination of User talk:Dan Smith00

/* ACM Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct */

English Patriot Man again?

Reply to Copyright Query by You

You are deleting a fact based content,Please read the website you are quoting for violation

2UE/3DB

Why the revert?

You have an email from Andrew M Nelson - File permission problem with File:SEMI President and CEO Ajit Manocha 2020 Photo.jpg[edit]

You've got mail!

Wikipedia and Copyrights issues

Not a copyright violation

Thanks for the review and edits

You've got mail!

File:Coxcommunications.svg - Undo file deletion

Understood and thanks!

Thanks for your instructions re:Polo

question

New message from 25 Cents FC

Copyright

Joseph Sanchez

Username change & copyrights on article edit

Copyright problem on Breakup of Yugoslavia

Copyright problem on Battle of Dhi Qar

See also links in Holocaust articles

Copyvio, Shooting of Ahmaud Arbery

Tswana people Edit

Copyright infringement on Draft:Minisat 01

Pashupati seal

Licensing for Nature open access article

Use of photo question

Thank you for your edit

Thank you

Samyaza

iOS Release Notes Copyright Issues

Using Census data and information available on Govt.Websites

Hello

Crown Copyright

Copyright noticeboard?

Material from copyrighted sources

Mistake

In addition

I made An actual CC notice for talk pages

Still grateful

Copyright 2

David Castle

Copyright takedown

Message from Neith-Nabu

Edits to F.T.A. Page

Dynamic tonality 2

Copyvio assessment

Copying within Wikipedia

Mystic Messenger article

Copyright Inquiry

Renaissance Workshop Company

I need your help

About the material I added to Maharajah Surajmal

Copyright Inquiry - Industrial espionage

Query regarding upload of a file

Lake County wine copyright-infrinement

Content Copied From Other Website

Recent edits on St. Edward's School, Shimla

Copyrights issue

Pulahan

Minor edit copyright query

3DB /2UE - a follow-up.

A barnstar for you!

copying from fandom

Copyrights Violation

Revdel request

Copyright of Godzilla 3-D (2007)

W. P. Andrew Lee page edits

Advice is needed

Reliable source

Respectful Appeal of Recent Notice About Vandalism

Potential Copyvio

Supposed copyright problem on Béla Uitz

Copying from Wikipedia

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Albert Doja