User talk:Sam Sailor: Difference between revisions
Sam Sailor (talk | contribs) |
JohnMilson (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 468: | Line 468: | ||
Hello {{BASEPAGENAME}}. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to ''you'' in particular.<p>The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when [[Wikipedia:Spotting possible copyright violations|hallmarks of copyvios]] in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.<p>If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied ''from the draft'', rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the [https://archive.org/web/ Wayback Machine] is very useful for sussing that out.)<p>If you do find a copyright violation, please ''do not'' decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using <nowiki>{{db-g12|url=</nowiki><tt>URL of source</tt>}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with <nowiki>{{subst:copyvio|url=</nowiki><tt>URL of source</tt>}}.<p>Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with [[WP:WEASEL|weasel words]]; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.<p> I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--[[User:Fuhghettaboutit|Fuhghettaboutit]] ([[User talk:Fuhghettaboutit#top|talk]]) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).<p> Sent via--[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC) |
Hello {{BASEPAGENAME}}. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to ''you'' in particular.<p>The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when [[Wikipedia:Spotting possible copyright violations|hallmarks of copyvios]] in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.<p>If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied ''from the draft'', rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the [https://archive.org/web/ Wayback Machine] is very useful for sussing that out.)<p>If you do find a copyright violation, please ''do not'' decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using <nowiki>{{db-g12|url=</nowiki><tt>URL of source</tt>}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with <nowiki>{{subst:copyvio|url=</nowiki><tt>URL of source</tt>}}.<p>Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with [[WP:WEASEL|weasel words]]; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.<p> I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--[[User:Fuhghettaboutit|Fuhghettaboutit]] ([[User talk:Fuhghettaboutit#top|talk]]) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).<p> Sent via--[[User:MediaWiki message delivery|MediaWiki message delivery]] ([[User talk:MediaWiki message delivery|talk]]) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC) |
||
<!-- Message sent by User:Fuhghettaboutit@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fuhghettaboutit/AfC_SpamList&oldid=634304948 --> |
<!-- Message sent by User:Fuhghettaboutit@enwiki using the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Fuhghettaboutit/AfC_SpamList&oldid=634304948 --> |
||
==Hello Sam_Sailor== |
|||
Thanks for your valuable comment. actually, I read many blog and article about Salamuddin Shaikh so i thought there should be a page about him. |
|||
I'd be honored if you provide me some tips for not removing this Salamuddin Shaikh's page. |
Revision as of 11:03, 23 November 2014
Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following:
|
This is Sam Sailor's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28Auto-archiving period: 31 days |
Template:Archive box collapsible Template:User talk disclaimer
The Signpost: 22 October 2014
- Featured content: Admiral on deck: a modern Ada Lovelace
- Traffic report: Death, War, Pestilence... Movies and TV
- WikiProject report: De-orphanning articles—a huge task but with a huge team of volunteers to help
Please be careful with templated warnings
Hi. Regarding this warning: please can you not use templated warnings in situations like this. The editor is a newbie and trying their best to make proper edits to the page, which is to be encouraged. The editor is now concerned that they may be blocked for disruptive editing.
I countenance patience, not templated warnings. Work with them, please, not against them. The fact that the editor has invited the discussion in the first place is to be applauded, and their subsequent attempts should be guided appropriately, not warning them harshly. Stephen! Coming... 12:04, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
- Stephen, I am led to believe that you have not made yourself acquainted with the editing history of the article, the Jung article now merged into Providence, the associated talk pages, dispute resolution discussions, multiple ANI discussions including community decision to block and ban church members, subsequent SPIs, etc. etc. As for the warnings these are both precise and appropriate, and you can take it to ANI if you still believe they are not. As for contents, no we do not encourage repeated additions of policy violating apologetic crap, but since you appear to do so, post your comment on the article talk page where it belongs. Sam Sing! 10:17, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Steve Daines
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Steve Daines. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Misuse of 3O. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 18:14, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
- Well done, Jim1138. Best, Sam Sing! 20:40, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 29 October 2014
- Featured content: Go West, young man
- In the media: Wikipedia a trusted source on Ebola; Wikipedia study labeled government waste; football biography goes viral
- Maps tagathon: Find 10,000 digitised maps this weekend
- Traffic report: Ebola, Ultron, and Creepy Articles
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:11, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Arab Winter
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Arab Winter. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see WP:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:05, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 05 November 2014
- In the media: Predicting the flu, MH17 conspiracy theories
- Traffic report: Sweet dreams on Halloween
Please comment on Talk:S. Truett Cathy
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:S. Truett Cathy. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 12 November 2014
- In the media: Amazon Echo; EU freedom of panorama; Bluebeard's Castle
- Traffic report: Holidays, anyone?
- Featured content: Wikipedia goes to church in Lithuania
- WikiProject report: Talking hospitals
Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews
The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.
If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)
If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.
Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.
I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).
Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello Sam_Sailor
Thanks for your valuable comment. actually, I read many blog and article about Salamuddin Shaikh so i thought there should be a page about him. I'd be honored if you provide me some tips for not removing this Salamuddin Shaikh's page.