User talk:Moonriddengirl

edit count | edit summary usage Wikipedia ads file info – #178 Welcome If you are here with questions about an article I have deleted or a copyright concern, please consider first reading my personal policies with regards to deletion and copyright, as these may provide your answer. While you can email me to reach me in my volunteer capacity, I don't recommend it. I very seldom check that email account. If you do email me, please leave a note here telling me so or I may never see it. I hardly ever check that account. To leave a message for me, press the "new section" or "+" tab at the top of the page, or simply click here. Remember to sign your message with ~~~~. I will respond to all civil messages. I attempt to keep conversations in one location, as I find it easier to follow them that way when they are archived. If you open a new conversation here, I will respond to you here. Please watchlist this page or check back for my reply; I will leave you a "talkback" notice if you request one and will generally try to trigger your automatic notification even if you don't. (I sometimes fail to be consistent there; please excuse me if I overlook it.) If I have already left a message at your talk page, unless I've requested follow-up here or it is a standard template message, I am watching it, but I would nevertheless appreciate it you could trigger my automatic notification. {{Ping}} works well for that. If you leave your reply here, I may respond at your talk page if it seems better for context. If you aren't sure if I'm watching your page, feel free to approach me here. Admins, if you see that I've made a mistake, please fix it. Hi Hello, Moonriddengirl. You have new messages at Voceditenore's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. I wanted to take the time to thank you for your help on this item on the Wendy Doniger article, to which I responded on my own talk page. I especially appreciate your having taken the time to post a note on my talk page with such a clear explanation. It was very helpful. Here are two notes I made on the same issue, one on my talk page thanking you there, and another I had posted on the Doniger discussion page a day earlier: From my talk page to you: Thank you that was very instructive and I appreciate your help in making that edit. Only to keep the record clear it was one sentence that you quite correctly deleted from my longer contribution, which long contribution was repeatedly bulk deleted rather than incisively corrected as you have done. Thanks for getting involved and for helping me. Meetoohelp (talk) 15:53, 26 October 2009 (UTC) From the Doniger discussion page to the other editors of that page: Thanks for the concern you show for the quality of this article. If there is a full sentence in the article that is found to be a copy of a full sentence from another page please delete it singly. On the other hand, to write an article about Doniger that contained none of the information on her cv would be difficult and of course unnecessary. This article is short not only on facts about Doniger, but also on Doniger's opinions, and conversely long on other peoples opinions. It should conform to what other bios of living person look like as to the relative space given to acts of the subjects, and then to criticism of that person. I think it would be helpful to look at articles about similar people, and I would suggest it should look something like Bart Ehrmans, whose work is similar and who attracts controversy for related reasons. In contrast to higher quality articles in Wikipedia, this Doniger page has the appearance of a blog spot. I suggest we editors should move to a bio with one pithy quote of criticism, and one pithy rebuttal quote, the remainder being a description of her work. There are plenty of internet forums for blogging and opinions and this article appears to have inappropriately achieved the character of those. Meetoohelp (talk) 15:03, 25 October 2009 (UTC) I am not sure if you intend just to make the technical contribution to the copyright issue, or to be more involved to increase the quality of the article, the later would certainly be welcomed, the article seems to need a referee of some sort. Thanks again. Meetoohelp (talk) 16:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC) Re CCI Hello, Moonriddengirl. You have new messages at Voceditenore's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template. Ping User:MLauba/CPC. Helpful? MLauba (talk) 16:36, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Yes, very! Good idea. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:54, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Devils Diciples further info on devils diciples discussion page24.217.66.219 (talk) 19:46, 23 October 2009 (UTC) You have been blocked in accordance with Wikipedia:No legal threats, including an indication that you are evidently intending to have your attorney start a suit against me personally. I'm afraid that under the circumstances, it is inadvisable for me to discuss this article with you. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 20:16, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Hennepin Technical College Zoinks, not only was the PROD'd article unrelated to the actual topic - it, well ... sucked. I at least made a more-than-reasonable stub out of it and moved it back to articlespace. Hope it's a little better now. Some of those Minnesota college article are in sad shape. Thanks for undeleting for me. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 21:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC) I had a feeling it wouldn't be of much use to you. :D Much, much improved. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC) Quick question re: deletion procedure DBZROCKS submitted this AfD, but then went ahead before the AfD was closed and wiped the article out, leaving a redirect. I know that we're told to be bold, but given that he's the one who submitted it for deletion, isn't that a little sudden? Or is that normal? Thanks for any insight you can provide. -moritheilTalk 07:29, 25 October 2009 (UTC) Yes, this is a little sudden, and it's forbidden in the Wikipedia:Guide to deletion: "You should not turn the article into a redirect. A functioning redirect will overwrite the AFD notice. It may also be interpreted as an attempt to "hide" the old content from scrutiny by the community." I suspect in this case, he was attempting a snowball close, but obviously inappropriately, unless he is simply so unfamiliar with AfD that he thinks its okay for the nominator to judge consensus. (And he should not be, since I have reason to know he's been active in them for years. I thought I recognized the name.) I would have suggested restoring the content with a note of explanation to him...and I see that User:CactusWriter has already done just that. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC) Aha. Thanks! -moritheilTalk 19:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC) Taking bets :) The two proposed guidelines will be eventually promoted with a sliver of voters, and two months later will be suddenly contested by a dozen people who didn't participate until then. ;) MLauba (talk) 10:49, 26 October 2009 (UTC) I'm not putting any money against that one. :D I wish I knew why people were so reluctant to talk about copyright problems. I understand that they don't necessarily want to address copyright problems, but you don't need understanding of copyright law or desire to undertake tedious tasks to talk about how to handle them. :/ And, by the way, you sell yourself short. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:04, 26 October 2009 (UTC) I suggest using {{cent}} to attract more users, and maybe other pages from WP:Publicising discussions. Flatscan (talk) 03:50, 27 October 2009 (UTC) Suspected sockpuppet of Pr3st0n As you were involved in the case of blocked user Pr3st0n, I thought I should bring to your attention this message: User talk:93gregsonl2#New to Wikipedia from new user FriargateFairy. Reference is made to the death of Pr3st0n which makes me suspect sockpuppetry, in view of the previous hoax on this subject. To support my suspicion, I've just discovered Gareth Forrest's MySpace page has the URL http://www.myspace.com/friargate-fairy . The page User:Pr3st0n/MSN strongly suggests that Pr3st0n's real name is Gareth Forrest. I've never been involved with a sockpuppetry case, so I'm not sure if that's sufficient evidence to file a formal investigation, or whether we should wait a bit longer to see what FriargateFairy does next. -- Dr Greg  talk  19:56, 26 October 2009 (UTC) Yes, User:Pr3st0n often signed his messages] with the name Gareth Forest. Given the new myspace account of a Gareth Forest of Preston is called FriargateFairy and this new account of FriargateFairy immediately sends out a troll message about the "death" of the user, there is little doubt this is a sock account. I have indefinitely blocked the account on that evidence. I find this is a straightforward case of block evasion. Because of all the drama previously caused by this account, I am not particularly keen to open a big investigation. — CactusWriter | needles 21:13, 26 October 2009 (UTC) Thanks for your rapid response, CactusWriter. -- Dr Greg  talk  22:08, 26 October 2009 (UTC) Sigh. :/ Thanks for uncovering this,  Dr Greg , and for dealing with it, CactusWriter. No investigation necessary when it quacks that loudly. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC) "Copyleft"? I have one article watchlisted that I removed after 7 days on CP, was recreated and the source now states "Copyleft by soandso". Re-list pending clarification or leave it? MLauba (talk) 08:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC) Relist. "Copyleft" is far too vague, I'm afraid, as it can mean any number of compatible or non-compatible licenses. But it sounds like it should be swiftly resolved. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:43, 27 October 2009 (UTC) Done, and indeed, it was. MLauba (talk) 11:57, 27 October 2009 (UTC) Deletion of 'Chuggington Episode List' I (largely) produced this page (either logged in or via an IP address) as the episodes came and went on BBC Iplayer. There is no complete list on the web, ergo it cannot therefore be referenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MGD11 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 27 October 2009 (UTC) The issue with the article was not a lack of references--it was that the descriptions of the episodes were copied. See Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2009 September 3. The article was listed for copyright evaluation, and when I addressed the listing I confirmed the duplication of text from the tagged site and other BBC sites. We can't copy text from other websites unless they can be verified to be free for our use. Even copying episode summaries constitutes a violation of our copyright policy otherwise. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:03, 27 October 2009 (UTC) Some (not all) were copied - after completing the episode list for series 1, I largely left Wikipedia alone. If the page could be re-instated, I would quite happily re-edit them to conform to Wikipedia standards. MGD11 (talk • contribs) —Preceding undated comment added 19:07, 27 October 2009 (UTC). I'm sorry, but I'm not authorized to restore the copyright violations, and there were no versions of that article that did not infringe copyright. However, if you'd like, I can retrieve the code for you without any creative text (such as episode summaries) so you can use it as the basis of a new article. Without creative text, there's no licensing issues with Wikipedia's contributors and you can start clean. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:11, 27 October 2009 (UTC) I could cope with that! Besides, the episodes on iplayer get rotated every week so a description of allthe episodes couldn't take more than a month...MGD11 (talk • contribs) 11:33, 29th October 2009 (GMT) Contesting Deletion of "Victoria Riskin" Article on Wikipedia Hi, Moonriddengirl (Deletion Administrator): I've been made aware that my recently posted article on Victoria Riskin was removed/deleted from Wikipedia website and I am contacting you to "contest deletion" as stated in Wiki instructions, as I don't understand why the posting was deleted due to "blatant copyright infringement." Here is the thread below to explain action take on my article: A page with this title has previously been deleted. If you are creating a new page with different content, please continue. If you are recreating a page similar to the previously deleted page, or are unsure, please first contact the deleting administrator using the information provided below. 17:46, 2 October 2009 Moonriddengirl (talk | contribs) deleted "Victoria Riskin" ‎ (Listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems for over seven days) Let me give you some background: I currently work in press/communications at the Writers Guild of America, West (WGAW) in Los Angeles. Former WGAW President/member/writer Victoria Riskin herself contacted me a few months ago asking, as a favor, if I could please post a profile page for her on Wikipedia, so I agreed to help her out. As I am new to Wiki and have never posted in article before, I tried my best to post an article on Vicki following Wiki's format/rules/guidelines, etc. Please note that ALL content for the article was NOT borrowed from other sources/websites but rather article content was repurposed/pulled from from Vicki's own personal bio that she supplied to me for Wiki use. Once the article was posted, I received notice/flaggings that this article may be removed if I did not include proper citations/references for content, so since all the content actually came from her own supplied bio, I thought the best thing to do was reference content from the WGAW's own website, since Vicki recently received an honorary award from the WGAW and much of the same content was used in our awards press release/program - I am not sure how this qualifies for copyright infringement? If I remove the references to WGAW website/release, will that solve this issue? Again, how can the content on Vicki's article be "copyright infringement" when 100% of content I used came from her own personal bio she supplied to me? Would it be better if you reposted article without external references, as I only included them later as I thought Wiki required me to or the article would be removed anyway? I would appreciate if you could please advise on how best to resolve at your soonest. Much appreciated, as I'd like to respond back to Victoria Riskin herself. If you'd like to talk more, I am can be reached at: 323-782-4651 (office). Thanks Gregg Mitchell WGAW —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggmitch (talk • contribs) 18:38, 27 October 2009 (UTC) Replied at your talk page. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:47, 27 October 2009 (UTC) Congratulations, Grand Tutnum Your service to Wikipedia has exceeded 2½ years, so you're entitled to display this badge.Mgreason (talk) 19:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC) This editor is a Veteran Editor II and is entitled to display this Bronze Editor Star. Thanks. :D Has it only been 2 1/2 years? Whatever did I used to do with my days? :O --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:29, 27 October 2009 (UTC) User:Justastud15 and repeated copyright violations Howdy Moonriddengirl! First, my apologies for coming to you directly on this issue. I am not completely sure how best to deal with this situation and you've been a help to me in the past on copyright violation issues; you have also dealt with the editor in question here. I just reverted edits to Matt Mitrione made by User:Justastud15 due to a large chunk of the edits being copy/pasted from [1]. I placed the standard warning on the user's talk page. I also reviewed the user's talk page as they have a habit of periodically blanking their talk page. This version of their talk page shows where you blocked the editor for 24 hours due to repeatedly violating the copyright policy and having been warned about it twice before that block. I do not know if you want to handle this, third, violation directly from my telling you here or if there is an admin board that would be more appropriate for me to make this mention on. WP:CP seems incorrect as the content is reverted, WP:AIV is wrong as it's not necessarily vandalism (it is but it isn't I guess), and I'm not sure how quickly reports to WP:AN are responded to (not that you may respond to this quickly). If there is someplace I should post a notice, let me know and I'll do it. Thanks for your help with this and for all you've done in the past. --TreyGeek (talk) 00:12, 28 October 2009 (UTC) Hi. This is fine; I'm happy to look into it. You could also do WP:ANI, but there's no reason. :/ (sigh) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:25, 28 October 2009 (UTC) All right. 72 hour block. Please let me know if you see him doing it again. I hope he will not. I really prefer not to have to block people who seem to be operating with good intent, but what can you do if they keep pasting content? :/ I greatly appreciate your letting me know about this. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 00:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC) Thanks for dealing with this. I too dislike having to report people who generally make good contributions. Frustrating more than anything. Thanks again. --TreyGeek (talk) 00:55, 28 October 2009 (UTC) wiki article on Nadia Reisenberg I need to include a reference to Nadia Reisenberg in a wiki article on Josef Hofmann. If possible, please inform me why the previous wiki article on Reisenberg got deleted. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alextierno98 (talk • contribs) 04:50, 29 October 2009 (UTC) Hi. It was deleted because it infringed on the copyright of [2]. According to our copyright policy, Wikipedia can only use previously published text if it can be verified to be free for reuse, either because it is public domain or it is explicitly licensed compatibly with our project. On the contrary, this one is marked "All content © 2000–2004 Judith Pinnolis. All rights reserved." The original contributor was notified and the article tagged for a week to give others an opportunity either to request copyright permission or to write a new article, but unfortunately no one did so. You are welcome to write a new article on this woman, using your own language or free sources. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:40, 29 October 2009 (UTC)