User talk:Lee Vilenski: Difference between revisions
Gerda Arendt (talk | contribs) m →TFA |
→Reminder for 'Wilfred Mott': new section Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 119: | Line 119: | ||
Thank today for [[2020 Masters (snooker)]], introduced (in 2020): "This article is about the 2020 edition of the Masters, an invitational event for the 16 best snooker players in the world. Seven-time winner Ronnie O'Sullivan decided not to play, and was replaced by Ali Carter, who reached the final where he played Stuart Bingham. Bingham won the event 10-8, winning his second Triple Crown event, having won the world championship in 2015. He was the oldest winner of the event. The event was one of the best Masters event in recent history, with world champion Judd Trump scoring a century break in every frame he won. The tournament was one of the final ones before the break due to COVID-19."! - [[User:Gerda Arendt/Images 2023|Happy new year]] (from vacation)! -- [[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 09:11, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
Thank today for [[2020 Masters (snooker)]], introduced (in 2020): "This article is about the 2020 edition of the Masters, an invitational event for the 16 best snooker players in the world. Seven-time winner Ronnie O'Sullivan decided not to play, and was replaced by Ali Carter, who reached the final where he played Stuart Bingham. Bingham won the event 10-8, winning his second Triple Crown event, having won the world championship in 2015. He was the oldest winner of the event. The event was one of the best Masters event in recent history, with world champion Judd Trump scoring a century break in every frame he won. The tournament was one of the final ones before the break due to COVID-19."! - [[User:Gerda Arendt/Images 2023|Happy new year]] (from vacation)! -- [[User:Gerda Arendt|Gerda Arendt]] ([[User talk:Gerda Arendt|talk]]) 09:11, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
||
== Reminder for 'Wilfred Mott' == |
|||
Thank you so much for your contributions to the Wilfred Mott discussion [[Talk:Doctor_Who_(2023_specials)#Wilfred_Mott|here]]. |
|||
Just wanted to leave a reminder that despite the consensus being reached, a question was still extended to you and others a couple of weeks ago, which would bear you answering if possible! [[User:Panda815|Panda815]] ([[User talk:Panda815|talk]]) 16:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 16:21, 20 January 2023
 | Projects can be found here. Currently working on updating all events on the 2019–20 snooker season up to GA status! You can help! |
editing
Most recent poster here: Panda815 (talk)
Content requiring reviews!
FAC(s)
Good Topics
GAN(s)
- John Higgins (start)
- 2022 Northern Ireland Open (nom)
- 2024 Masters (snooker) (nom)
- Liang Wenbo (nom)
- 2006 World Snooker Championship (start)
- 2024 Tour Championship (start)
- 2024 World Snooker Championship (start)
Service Award
|
|---|
 Currently, this editor has earned the Master Editor service award.
To get to the next level, Master Editor II, he needs to meet the time requirement. Progress towards the next level (by time): [ 307.5 days / 365.2 days ]84.2% completed |
Happy New Year, Lee Vilenski!
Lee Vilenski,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia. See this for background context.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 21:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 21:44, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Biographies request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:H. P. Lovecraft on a "Biographies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 03:30, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Economy, trade, and companies request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Cloudflare on a "Economy, trade, and companies" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 05:30, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
FAC?
Hi Lee, hope you are well. A few months back you were kind enough to review Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1973–74 Gillingham F.C. season/archive1. I was wondering if you might have any spare time and fancy reviewing Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1937–38 Gillingham F.C. season/archive1? If not, no worries -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Lee, you said in your edit summary to nudge you if you didn't look at this FAC by the end of the weekend ;-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:48, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: Media, the arts, and architecture request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Nonfiction on a "Media, the arts, and architecture" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 08:31, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Laurence Cousin
Thank you @Lee Vilenski for taking the time to review Laurence Cousin article and for your helpful comments. All my best Lewolka (talk) 11:54, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- No drama Lewolka, I have completed your other article as well. Hope everything is good. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:14, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks again! all the best Lewolka (talk) 14:28, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
Plot summaries in episode lists
When writing plot summaries in episode lists in articles, is there really a minimum when it comes to how many words we should use? Rattatast (talk) 23:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Less than 200 words per episode, OR (not both) 500 in a plot summary for the season/show. Full policy is at MOS:TVPLOT Rattatast. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 23:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- I already know that. The thing I don't understand is if a summary for an episode is under 100 words, why do some users call it "copyvio" without any evidence? Here are a few cases I've seen: [1], [2], and [3]. They would even even put hidden comments in episode sections, claiming a summary of less 100 words would be deemed copyvio, and those comments would even cite MOS:TVPLOT (here's an example: [4]). But nothing in the MOS:TVPLOT page says it's copyvio to write something under 100 words. Rattatast (talk) 23:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Rattatast "copyvio" refers to a copyright violation. Text copied from elsewhere isn't suitable for Wikipedia, as it is copyrighted. Plot summaries must be written by editors, not copy and pasted from elsewhere, regardless of length. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 23:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- I understand that "copyvio" means copyright violation. The reason why I'm writing this topic is that some users would call an episode summary "copyvio" simply because it's short but without proving if it's even copied from a specific media. This is unjust. Rattatast (talk) 00:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- You'd be better off asking the user(s) that removed the text where it was copied from if it really is your own work. I doubt that people are removing the text because it's a short summary. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 00:14, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- I could ask that user but I'm not sure if he'll respond. In fact, he never answered this complaint. Rattatast (talk) 00:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Well, that might be, but it's a bit odd not to confirm where the copyvio might have come from. Any ideas how we can sort this out BaldiBasicsFan? I'll revdel the stuff if you've got a source it is copied from. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 00:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Voicebox64 writes episode summaries on both Wikipedia and Fandom, as I proved on the 101 Dalmatian Street article on the Fandom Disney Wiki. Usually they write plot summaries for the wikis they use, but if they use text from another wiki they wrote for, does that count as WP:COPYVIO per say? BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 00:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- If they do it here first, there is no issue. Under CC-BY-SA, you could technically copy text from a page over, but you also need to give credit, so in practice it doesn't work. I'm not really sure what that has to do with this users query though. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 00:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- For The Chicken Squad issue, I have written episodes summaries of my own with shows like Santiago of the Seas and Urusei Yatsura. However, those are rare occasions as a rarely write summaries. I don't copy paste nowadays though, but writing summaries with a 100-200 word scale can be quite difficult. Even if you write an original summary is less than 100 words, it could be suspected as copyvio. I might think about writing summaries for Chicken Squad in the 100-200 word scale now that you brought me here. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 01:11, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- If they do it here first, there is no issue. Under CC-BY-SA, you could technically copy text from a page over, but you also need to give credit, so in practice it doesn't work. I'm not really sure what that has to do with this users query though. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 00:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Voicebox64 writes episode summaries on both Wikipedia and Fandom, as I proved on the 101 Dalmatian Street article on the Fandom Disney Wiki. Usually they write plot summaries for the wikis they use, but if they use text from another wiki they wrote for, does that count as WP:COPYVIO per say? BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 00:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Well, that might be, but it's a bit odd not to confirm where the copyvio might have come from. Any ideas how we can sort this out BaldiBasicsFan? I'll revdel the stuff if you've got a source it is copied from. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 00:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- I could ask that user but I'm not sure if he'll respond. In fact, he never answered this complaint. Rattatast (talk) 00:25, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- You'd be better off asking the user(s) that removed the text where it was copied from if it really is your own work. I doubt that people are removing the text because it's a short summary. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 00:14, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- I understand that "copyvio" means copyright violation. The reason why I'm writing this topic is that some users would call an episode summary "copyvio" simply because it's short but without proving if it's even copied from a specific media. This is unjust. Rattatast (talk) 00:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Rattatast "copyvio" refers to a copyright violation. Text copied from elsewhere isn't suitable for Wikipedia, as it is copyrighted. Plot summaries must be written by editors, not copy and pasted from elsewhere, regardless of length. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 23:58, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- I already know that. The thing I don't understand is if a summary for an episode is under 100 words, why do some users call it "copyvio" without any evidence? Here are a few cases I've seen: [1], [2], and [3]. They would even even put hidden comments in episode sections, claiming a summary of less 100 words would be deemed copyvio, and those comments would even cite MOS:TVPLOT (here's an example: [4]). But nothing in the MOS:TVPLOT page says it's copyvio to write something under 100 words. Rattatast (talk) 23:54, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
So you didn't remove the text because it was a copyright violation, but because you assumed so due to length? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 01:13, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Correct. There was an incident that happened with The Cuphead Show! where an IP removed the summaries for the purpose of vandalism, but another user whose logged-in thinks they were pasted from Fandom. However the user didn't give us proof. I'm not an expert but sometimes users may copy an overly detailed plot from Fandom though obviously copyvio. Most people I know don't do this when making plots over 200 words, but that can happen rarely. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 01:23, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- If a log-in user claims the text was pasted from somewhere without providing any evidence, it's probably just a bluff. Anyway, it's normal to write just the main part of the plot rather than the entire plot. Rattatast (talk) 05:54, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, so just a reminder, we don't remove information on the presumption that the info is copyrighted if we can't find a source. We do have plenty of admin who work on this. For individual users, try WP:CCI. If there's any doubt, tag the information and enter a discussion as outlined in WP:CV. I can't tell you if the text Rattatast has added was a violation, but I also couldn't find where it may have come from. I would recommend communicating on the talk page for the article in question to move on. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:47, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- With regards to text being judged as copyvio without evidence, I'm having that problem in the SuperKitties article. Rattatast (talk) 14:53, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- BaldiBasicsFan that's ridiculous, you cannot just remove information because you think it might be copied as it is short. I've already pointed you to the right places for where and how to deal with copyright violations. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:22, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Per MOS:TVPLOT, summaries should be about 100-200 words in length, but pointed out in hidden note in many episode lists, "those substantially less than 100 words are most likely to be scrutinized for possible copyright violation." BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 15:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Huh? So someone has left a comment (not in the MOS) that there might be copyvio, so it should be scrutinized, so you just delete, without checking? That's crazy. Anyone can leave a hidden comment. A larger written summary is just as likely to be a copyright violation as a shorter one. If you have a source location, fantastic, otherwise push it to the relevant noticeboard with your thoughts. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Per MOS:TVPLOT, summaries should be about 100-200 words in length, but pointed out in hidden note in many episode lists, "those substantially less than 100 words are most likely to be scrutinized for possible copyright violation." BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 15:34, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- BaldiBasicsFan that's ridiculous, you cannot just remove information because you think it might be copied as it is short. I've already pointed you to the right places for where and how to deal with copyright violations. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:22, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- With regards to text being judged as copyvio without evidence, I'm having that problem in the SuperKitties article. Rattatast (talk) 14:53, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, so just a reminder, we don't remove information on the presumption that the info is copyrighted if we can't find a source. We do have plenty of admin who work on this. For individual users, try WP:CCI. If there's any doubt, tag the information and enter a discussion as outlined in WP:CV. I can't tell you if the text Rattatast has added was a violation, but I also couldn't find where it may have come from. I would recommend communicating on the talk page for the article in question to move on. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:47, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page stalker) FWIW, If I've understood copyright policy correctly, if the same person writes content on both Fandom (or anywhere else really) and also on Wikipedia, then there is no copyvio issue at all. You can publish your own material to both, under the conditions of each. If the material is on Fandom and written by someone else, then it can also be copied over to Wikipedia, as Fandom text is under CC-BY-SA... with the proviso that proper attribution information is provided... detail on that is at Help:Adding open license text to Wikipedia. In any case deleting material on sight, with no evidence that any copyvio has occurred, seems a little bizarre... — Amakuru (talk) 18:03, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm pretty sure that you'd still need to attribute to yourself even if you'd written both. You can 100% plagiarise yourself. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 19:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Adding BrickMaster02 to this conversation as they were editing the SuperKitties article a lot. BaldiBasicsFan (talk) 22:43, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:Lok Sabha on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 13:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
The Signpost: 16 January 2023
- Special report: Coverage of 2022 bans reveals editors serving long sentences in Saudi Arabia since 2020
- News and notes: Revised Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelines up for vote, WMF counsel departs, generative models under discussion
- In the media: Court orders user data in libel case, Saudi Wikipedia in the crosshairs, Larry Sanger at it again
- Technology report: View it! A new tool for image discovery
- In focus: Busting into Grand Central
- Serendipity: How I bought part of Wikipedia – for less than $100
- Featured content: Flip your lid
- Traffic report: The most viewed articles of 2022
- From the archives: Five, ten, and fifteen years ago
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Talk:The Rutles on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 02:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Feedback request: All RFCs request for comment
Your feedback is requested at Template talk:Infobox boxing match on a "All RFCs" request for comment. Thank you for helping out!
You were randomly selected to receive this invitation from the list of Feedback Request Service subscribers. If you'd like not to receive these messages any more, you can opt out at any time by removing your name.
Message delivered to you with love by Yapperbot :) | Is this wrong? Contact my bot operator. | Sent at 16:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello Lee Vilenski
Out of curiosity, what do you think about that. Would you mind to eventually help reach (new) consensus? Cheers Dawid2009 (talk) 20:57, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
- I can't say it matters all that much, but we should probably make the titles a bit more exciting than "sustained success". Winning his first Ballon D'Or seems like a suitable comment. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:40, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
GA review
Hi there. Long time no see. I have nominated [[Shogo Makishima]] for GA but couldn't find a review in the past month. It's a small article but it was copyedited. In case you review it, I'd appreciate it. Cheers. Tintor2 (talk) 21:22, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
TFA
Thank today for 2020 Masters (snooker), introduced (in 2020): "This article is about the 2020 edition of the Masters, an invitational event for the 16 best snooker players in the world. Seven-time winner Ronnie O'Sullivan decided not to play, and was replaced by Ali Carter, who reached the final where he played Stuart Bingham. Bingham won the event 10-8, winning his second Triple Crown event, having won the world championship in 2015. He was the oldest winner of the event. The event was one of the best Masters event in recent history, with world champion Judd Trump scoring a century break in every frame he won. The tournament was one of the final ones before the break due to COVID-19."! - Happy new year (from vacation)! -- Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:11, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Reminder for 'Wilfred Mott'
Thank you so much for your contributions to the Wilfred Mott discussion here.
Just wanted to leave a reminder that despite the consensus being reached, a question was still extended to you and others a couple of weeks ago, which would bear you answering if possible! Panda815 (talk) 16:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC)