User talk:JohnCD: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
|archive = User talk:JohnCD/Archive %(counter)d |
|archive = User talk:JohnCD/Archive %(counter)d |
||
}} |
}} |
||
{{db-user | |
{{db-user |rationale=}} |
||
{|style="background-color: #FFCC77; border: 1px solid #000000; margin: 2em; padding: 0em;" |
{|style="background-color: #FFCC77; border: 1px solid #000000; margin: 2em; padding: 0em;" |
||
Revision as of 19:46, 2 April 2015
Please use the rationale parameter to explain why this user talk page should be deleted. (E.g., {{db-u1|rationale= }}.) Thanks!
Per the User page guidelines, user talk pages are generally not deleted, barring legal threats or other grievous violations that have to be removed for legal reasons. In addition, nonpublic personal information and potentially libellous information posted to your talk page may be removed by making a request for oversight.
Users who have left Wikipedia may be added to Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians.
Welcome to my talk page. to leave me a message.
If you have come here about a page I deleted, you will probably find the explanation here; if that does not answer your question, click the link just above to leave me a message. Please mention the name of the page, and sign your post with four "tilde" characters ~~~~ so that I know who you are. If I have left a message on your talk page, please reply there; I am watching it. If you leave a message here I will usually reply here, but if my reply contains advice I hope you will find useful, I may place it on your talk page. (Talk page stalkers: you are welcome; if you see no reply here, there is probably one on the other talk page; I have decided to stop making a note here when I reply there). You may E-mail me via the "E-mail this user" link under "Toolbox" in the left-hand sidebar, but you will get a faster response here; I suggest you do not use e-mail unless you need privacy. I will normally reply on your talk page, not by e-mail. |
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 |
This page has archives. Sections older than 13 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Soft robotics
Hey John. If some other people than infringers devoted time to this draft then to that extent it's a shame their time would be wasted upon deletion but I think it should be because it's just too tainted. I've just removed numerous additional copyvios from diverse sources and I'm not at all sure the material left is clean (I also think it would be not just cleaner but much easier for this to be built from a fresh start; working from a disjointed mess is too hard). Having a history that is so riddled with removed copyvios is also problematic.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:39, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Fuhghettaboutit: maybe you're right, but:
- Seven of the eleven passages I removed were from from http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fbioe.2014.00003/full, which has a CC-BY license, so that a {{CC-notice}} template would make them legal.
- One of yours (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4090912/) is a copy of the same paper
- I'm pretty sure Nyanglish.com is copying from us - I found several sentences where the only Ghits were Nyanglish and the wpedia.goo.ne.jp mirror site - so that one's not a copyvio.
- That still leaves the other problems (and I haven't looked at the images yet). It seems a pity to lose all the work that has been done on compiling references. It rather depends how much work SirJamesHunt wants to put into it. If he's prepared to do a major rewrite, I would be inclined to keep the draft for him to use as a basis. Otherwise, I agree it should be deleted. Perhaps the list of references could be preserved somewhere against the day someone tries again - it's certainly a notable subject. JohnCD (talk) 22:26, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah you're right Nyanglish is some sort of English phrase search engine but most of what I removed was not from there. The CC-BY content was still a copyvio since it was being used without any attribution, much less in the manner specified by the licensors. I don't want to jump any guns if anyone is willing to take this on. Let's see what it looks like in a month.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. I thought of putting back the paragraphs copied from the CC-BY paper, but although a general {{CC-notice}} template would make it legal, i.e. not a copyright violation, there is still the separate issue of WP:Plagiarism: the authors should be credited for their words where they are used, and I'm not sure how best to do that. JohnCD (talk) 12:42, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
- Just to be clear (and pedantic, sorry), a general CC-notice template would not be sufficient. CC licenses require specific attribution credit if supplied, and the authors do specify at the bottom of the external article. Click on "appropriate credit" at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:50, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
- Yes. I thought of putting back the paragraphs copied from the CC-BY paper, but although a general {{CC-notice}} template would make it legal, i.e. not a copyright violation, there is still the separate issue of WP:Plagiarism: the authors should be credited for their words where they are used, and I'm not sure how best to do that. JohnCD (talk) 12:42, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah you're right Nyanglish is some sort of English phrase search engine but most of what I removed was not from there. The CC-BY content was still a copyvio since it was being used without any attribution, much less in the manner specified by the licensors. I don't want to jump any guns if anyone is willing to take this on. Let's see what it looks like in a month.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey Fuhghettaboutit (talk) and JohnCD (talk) - Thank you so much for all your effort. The article has been written by a whole range of people working in this field. We made a call on our newsletter to involve as many people as possible to get an excellent article that is not just based on the opinion of one researcher, but rather by the community. Unfortunately, it seems quite some people have used simply bits and piece from their publications. Which of course is not OK. I would really appreciate if you could keep the draft, so that we could work on it. I will try to make sure that people know that they are not allowed to copy and paste. Regarding the FrontierSin article I know the authors and I can ask them to upload the right copyright statement, if you could give me a pointer where and how to do it.
Thank you again for your help here. I think we can make a really strong article, when we get rid of all the copyright issues. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SirJamesHunt (talk • contribs) 16:38, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
- @SirJamesHunt: that sounds very promising. The framework of the article is still there at Draft:Soft robotics, and I left all the references in place to make reconstruction easier. The way to make a copyright release is described at WP:Donating copyright materials. The actual copyright owner has to make the release, and needs to understand that Wikipedia's CC-BY-SA license allows readers to copy, modify and re-use material for any purpose including commercial, so that restrictions like "Wikipedia only", "Education only" or "No derivatives" are not acceptable.
- The Frontiersin paper is already released under a compatible license, but requires a {{Cc-notice}} template to provide attribution. I had supposed that one such notice at the end of the article was sufficient, but Fuhghettaboutit says above that that is not enough. We need a variant saying "This paragraph incorporates text from this source", which would also cover the issues described in WP:Plagiarism. I will ask advice about how to do that. JohnCD (talk) 11:06, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you JohnCD (talk). I wait then for your feedback. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SirJamesHunt (talk • contribs) 19:58, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
- To clarify, what I was talking about is the specific attribution requirements under the licenses. CC licenses need to provide "appropriate credit", which, as stated at the license I just linked, would require us the mind this language:
"If supplied, you must provide the name of the creator and attribution parties, a copyright notice, a license notice, a disclaimer notice, and a link to the material."
The cc template provides no facility to credit "the name of the creator". Meanwhile, the external site says "this is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice."
So, to be concrete, what I was saying was that to comply with copyright, just the CC-notice template would not be sufficient. The credit would need to say something, at the least, like:
That, in my opinion, is required to comply with the plain and express terms of the CC license's appropriate credit requirement I quote above.This article incorporates text available under the CC BY 1.0 license. and is authored by Cecilia Laschi and Matteo Cianchetti. (Emphasis added in underline.)
Now, as to citing each paragraph, that is also required, but is a matter of avoiding plagiarism, and I don't think we need any CC template for each paragraph, but rather to just follow Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Free and copyrighted sources and its following section of examples. They require that any word-for-word copied text – whether under a free license or from 1,000 BCE and in the public domain – be given in-text attribution, be in quotation marks, and have an inline citation.
Of course, this would also fulfill the stated requirement listed at the external cite of providing "that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice".
- To clarify, what I was talking about is the specific attribution requirements under the licenses. CC licenses need to provide "appropriate credit", which, as stated at the license I just linked, would require us the mind this language:
Sorry to delve into such layers of complication, but I believe the authors go beyond the bounds of the CC license they have released their material under, by purporting to require this additional form of credit as to the copyright (if they could require this, then my model example above for a vaid CC notice would still not be enough). However, it is a happy confluence of events, that to comply with our existing plagiarism avoidance requirements, we would also be satisfying this "overreach" by them. I hope this is clear; we all know how complicated this stuff can be, and as a lawyer (though not one that specializes in intellectual property law), I am used to parsing complicated statutes and the like.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:45, 21 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you JohnCD (talk) and Fuhghettaboutit (talk) for your detailed help. This is very much appreciated. Sorry to ask again, I just wanted to make sure that I understood it correctly. We have to add the line
This article incorporates text available under the CC BY 1.0 license. and is authored by Cecilia Laschi and Matteo Cianchetti
if we use exact copies of the text from this publication and, in addition, we have to highlight in every paragraph were we used the same text clearly highlighted as citations (italic for example and in quotation marks). Since, as it seems that complete full paragraphs have been copied, I think it might be better to rewrite these paragraphs in our own words. However, I read on Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Free and copyrighted sources that a summary is potentially problem as well. How should we address that? Is it enough to cite the paper or do we have to use the
This article incorporates text available under the CC BY 1.0 license. and is authored by Cecilia Laschi and Matteo Cianchetti
at the end of the article or is it even still required to have a notice at every single paragraph? My understanding would be that an inline citation at these paragraphs would be sufficient when we use our own words. Is that correct?
- You have to add that line if you use more extensive quotations from the source than you could justify for a copy under full reservation under non-free content policy and guideline. Summary is only a problem if you follow the source too closely; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing for avoiding this issue. If you do not use extensive quotations from these sources and do not paraphrase too closely, you do not have to use the line; you simply cite your source as you would any other. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:05, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
- @SirJamesHunt: Hey James. Since I was addressing an analysis, and I don't want to leave you reading between the lines (though you did a good job), to summarize my understanding:
- To comply with copyright, if you have word-for word copied or close paraphrasing, and you use a lot of material – beyond what might be allowed under fair use if it was fully copyrighted (if it did not bear a free license) – yes, you would just need to place a single time, in the references section: "{{CC-notice|cc=by|url=http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fbioe.2014.00003/full}} and is authored by Cecilia Laschi and Matteo Cianchetti", or something similar that actually names the authors (note that I used the underline previously only because I was emphasizing what was in my view missing; I did not mean to imply that underline code ("<u>...</u>") should be placed in the article). (By the way, I would not place quotations in italics, unless the original was in italics, and maybe not even then...) If you are just using the text as a source of information and there is no word-for-word copying or close paraphrasing, or there's not much use, avoid plagiarism (see below), with in-text attribution, cite your source and so on, but you do not need any CC notice.
- To avoid plagiarism:
- 2a) Word-for-word quotes need to be attributed in-text "(according to ....); need to be in quotation marks; and need to be clearly credited using an inline citation
- 2b) Material not word-for-word copied, but closely paraphrasing must be attributed in-text, have an inline citation, should still have quotes around distinctive words or phrases and the source must be cited.
- 2c) Material properly paraphrased, not closely and not word-for-word, should just have a citation ([[see Wikipedia:Verifiability, but nothing else above would be needed.
Nakulmehra (talk) 06:34, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Draft:Suraj Gowda
I had go through all your suggested links and I had understand your notability requirements. I feel the subject meets your requirements because I had mentioned all the verifiable evidence and also it's outside of Wikipedia as per notability guidelines. And he is a celebrity so also it's not a permastub. Our references are from good news sources and net blogs as mentioned in Wiki guideleines. So plz re-consider it. Thankyou.
- No. Sorry, but four different reviewers have now declined this, and after the discussion at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Suraj Gowda I think it would be a waste of your time, as well as ours, to keep submitting it. If you want, you may appeal at WP:Deletion review, but my advice is to give up on this one and find something else to edit. JohnCD (talk) 22:37, 18 March 2015 (UTC)
Why did you delete Adventures In Funny, and how can it be restored?
I kindly ask you to please restore the article. It meets the guidelines and frankly, I am insulted by your removing it. I can and will gladly go through the steps necessary to bring it up to par if there was something wrong with it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fabulouslymaddy (talk • contribs) 23:37, 18 March 2015
- Sorry, no. Wikipedia is a project to build an encyclopedia, not a social-networking site for people to write about themselves and their friends and their Youtube videos. The test for inclusion is called Wikipedia:Notability and is not a matter of opinion but has to be demonstrated by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Myspace, Facebook, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones and anything based on press releases. The test is, have people not connected with the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about? JohnCD (talk) 10:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Retrieving a deleted page
Hi
I would like to retrieve a deleted page. NikitaSanthosh/SreejithTR. I will be editing this againand submitting it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NikitaSanthosh (talk • contribs) 12:00, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
- @NikitaSanthosh: Done - I have restored User:NikitaSanthosh/Sreejith TR for you to work on. Read WP:Your first article, WP:Notability (people) and WP:Notability (summary) for advice. JohnCD (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Requesting for Retrieving a deleted page to do editing.
Draft:Suraj Gowda https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Suraj_Gowda&action=edit&redlink=1
I had go through all your suggested links and now I understand your notability requirements. I did some research on it and found some good resources and as he is a celebrity so also it's not a permastub. I got some references which is from good news sources and net blogs as mentioned in Wiki guideleines. So plz retrieving that deleted page so that I can do changes with Suraj Gowda title name in Sandbox.
Right now when I opened my Sandbox it's showing like: From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia < User:NakulmehraRedirect page
Redirect to:
Draft:Suraj Gowda
This is a redirect from a page that has been moved (renamed). This page was kept as a redirect to avoid breaking links, both internal and external, that may have been made to the old page name. For more information follow the category link.
So, please do needful.
Thankyou. Nakulmehra (talk) 07:40, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Nakulmehra: No. I told you last time, you are wasting your time, as well as ours, and I recommend that you drop it. If you have really found new evidence of ""significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" to the standard of WP:ENTERTAINER, you should apply at WP:Deletion review. JohnCD (talk) 22:55, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
publish Emirates Transport Page
Dear Mr. JohnCD
My page Emirate Transport had been deleted many times because the violation of terms (Image Licenses). I will republish the same page without images, so the content of the page will be suitable to wikipedia terms. Please be mentioned and thank you
Best Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.0.89.66 (talk) 14:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Appteco: (I presume you are Appteco - please sign in before editing). The problem was not just the image, the text also was copied from the company's website and report. Even apart from copyright problems, copying the company's own words is not the way to make an acceptable encyclopedia article. See User:JohnCD/Not a noticeboard.
- You should make a draft article at Draft:Emirates Transport, written in your own words, with much less detail. Include only things that a general encyclopedia reader would be interested in, not the story the company wants to tell, and not an endless list of all its operations and subsidiaries. Anyone who wants all that detail can go to the company website. Read WP:Your first article for advice, and include references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" to establish WP:Notability. If you are connected with the company, read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. JohnCD (talk) 23:08, 24 March 2015 (UTC)
Company Question
Het John ti mąkę sure i dont mąkę The same mistake i was wondering what is The recomended age for any Company to have a page on Them should be sincerly techinfosource ps trąbkę for not banning me for one mistake. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Techinfosource (talk • contribs) 18:46, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
Dear John,
I dont want to make the same mistake and get my ban from Wikipedia so i was wondering what is the minimum age of a Company should be to have a Wikipedia page on them
Sincerly Techinfosource Ps Thanks for not banning me
- @Techinfosource: I will reply on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 12:24, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Invitation
Hello, JohnCD,
The Editing team is asking for your help with VisualEditor. I am contacting you because you posted to a feedback page for VisualEditor. Please tell them what they need to change to make VisualEditor work well for you. The team has a list of top-priority problems, but they also want to hear about small problems. These problems may make editing less fun, take too much of your time, or be as annoying as a paper cut. The Editing team wants to hear about and try to fix these small things, too.
You can share your thoughts by clicking this link. You may respond to this quick, simple, anonymous survey in your own language. If you take the survey, then you agree your responses may be used in accordance with these terms. This survey is powered by Qualtrics and their use of your information is governed by their privacy policy.
More information (including a translateable list of the questions) is posted on wiki at mw:VisualEditor/Survey 2015. If you have questions, or prefer to respond on-wiki, then please leave a message on the survey's talk page.
Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 15:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
requesting to activate my page
the judithjoni article is my own article so please activate my page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Judithjoni (talk • contribs) 12:21, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Judithjoni: please understand that Wikipedia is not a social-networking site like Facebook or LinkedIn for people who just want to write about themselves. As an encyclopedia article, Judith joni is not appropriate, see Wikipedia is not about YOU and Wikipedia:Autobiography. If you plan to contribute to the encyclopedia, you may write something about yourself on your user page User:Judithjoni but first, please read WP:User pages, particularly the section WP:UPNO, and WP:NOTWEBHOST. JohnCD (talk)
then how can i create an articel
then how can i create an article based my information — Preceding unsigned comment added by Judithjoni (talk • contribs) 13:20, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
- If you mean an encyclopedia article about you in Wikipedia, the answer is, you can't. You can make another one, but it will be deleted, because Wikipedia articles are only about people who are notable, which means they have been the subject of significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources. Not many people are notable - I'm not, so I will never have an article, and nor are you.
- If you want to write about yourself, you can do that at sites like Facebook, or LinkedIn, or Wikibios, but not here. JohnCD (talk) 14:23, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Not
I am not Victoria rios — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarmhouseRULES (talk • contribs) 19:02, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
- @FarmhouseRULES: that's OK, I only said IF you are... Those links are worth reading anyway. JohnCD (talk) 19:06, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Prehensile Monkeytailed Skink
Hello. I was working on a page and before I finished I saw that you had done a "speedy delete." The page was for Prehensile Monkeytailed Skink. There has been a stub for years so I decided to day to flesh it out. PMS was the second band on Bulb Records, which has a page, and I think people would agree is relevant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MiInsider (talk • contribs) 19:37, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
- I have replied on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 20:35, 27 March 2015 (UTC)
Operation Pax Romana
Thanks for following up Calamondin12 (talk · contribs)'s well-justified tag by starting the AfD. I've just deleted the article for being an obvious hoax. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 09:13, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Nick-D: Thanks. I am hesitant about tagging a possible hoax with G3 if it takes an hour or so's research to be sure, but once the evidence is laid out, speedy deletion often becomes the right answer. I have met some things that on the face of it look like a blatant hoax, but turn out to be true. My favourite example: would you believe an annual festival to celebrate the culture of people of mixed Croatian/Maori descent? Check out Tarara Day. JohnCD (talk) 21:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
- That is obscure... That said, I've had Emu War watchlisted for years ;) Nick-D (talk) 09:11, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
Grace Sai
Hi JohnCD,
I did not fully understand the Sandbox feature. I have now submitted a Draft page for "Grace Sai" for review, so hopefully you can look at that and approve?
Cheers
"Tobias Tan" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tobiastan (talk • contribs) 11:23, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Tobiastan: You don't have to apply for your draft to be reviewed, it is in the queue at Category:Pending AfC submissions, but there are about 500 waiting - a reviewer will get to it in due course. JohnCD (talk) 21:59, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Unreviewed Article
Hello there. I was just wondering if you could just spend a moment and review this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Caszadeh and possibly remove the "tag" from the top of the page if it doesn't need any cleanup. Thank you in advance. SlimSlim (talk) 13:50, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
- @SlimSlim: be patient, it does not need an admin to review a new article, and you do not have to ask for it to be reviewed. The reviewers are working their way through Category:All unreviewed new articles, which tells them what needs doing, and your article will be reviewed in its turn. JohnCD (talk) 21:35, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the response.SlimSlim (talk) 12:00, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Deletion of my user page ICEM4K
I would like to understand why my user page user:Icem4k why it was deleted cause that reasron on the discussion page is so not true. cause I know how a facebook profile looks like and my user page was far from that I just an about me where I edited and what created what is wrong with that help me... help me understand help me. **Confused** — Chabota Kanguya 08:41, 1 April 2015 (UTC) comment added 08:37, 1 April 2015 (UTC)
- I have replied on your talk page. JohnCD (talk) 16:28, 1 April 2015 (UTC)