User talk:Diannaa: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 17:09, 6 July 2015

Skip to the bottom ⇩ ·

Where this user is, it is 12:40 am, 18 September 2024 UTC [refresh].

Change from announced time table for the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case

You are receiving this message either because you are a party to the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case, because you have commented in the case request, or the AN or AE discussions leading to this arbitration case, or because you have specifically opted in to receiving these messages. Unless you are a party to this arbitration case, you may opt out of receiving further messages at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Arbitration enforcement/Notification list. The drafters of the Arbitration enforcement arbitration case have published a revised timetable for the case, which changes what you may have been told when the case was opened. The dates have been revised as follows: the Evidence phase will close 5 July 2015, one week earlier than originally scheduled; the Workshop phase will close 26 July 2015, one week later than originally scheduled; the Proposed decision is scheduled to be posted 9 August 2015, two weeks later than originally scheduled. Thank you. On behalf of the arbitration clerks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:58, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

puzzled

You said a username I reported wasn't a blatant violation...but I was thinking "Phuccc" sounds out as "Fuck". I guess I can drop a note on their talk page but am wondering 1)why it isn't blatant and 2)would variants such as Fuk/Phuk/Phuck/Fuccc be considered blatant. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 15:36, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree it could be offensive to some, but my feeling is it's intended as tongue in cheek. I can post on the user's talk if you like? -- Diannaa (talk) 15:37, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Phuc (and other variants) is a common vietnamese name. All I see are constructive edits from the user. - NQ (talk) 15:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Diannaa - I took your advice on the Usernames page, went ahead and asked them on their talk page why they chose it. And yes, NQ, their edits do all look constructive. Shearonink (talk) 15:45, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip, NQ. I did not know that. Reminds me of Dr. Moronkeji Fagbemi, who recently set off the ~~edit filter~~ bot for both "moron" and "fag" by using his real name for his acct -- Diannaa (talk) 15:48, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's always interesting to see the usernames flagged by DeltaQuadBot at WP:UAA. For eg. the current report consists of many usernames that are actual names.- NQ (talk) 15:57, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Question

Hello, I am an intern at Solitary Watch, and my boss requested that I edit the Solitary Watch Wikipedia page to update the information and make it more accurate. I received a message from you saying that my edits had been removed since I did not have permission from the copyright holder. The copyright holder, my boss, has given me permission to edit the page. How can I fix this? ThanksHallie.tg (talk) 15:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's information to get you started at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials and WP:consent. You have a conflict of interest, and should not be editing the page at all. I am placing some infon on that topic on your user talk page. -- Diannaa (talk) 17:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help Needed

I am having an issue with a new user removing sourced information, changing formats from direct links to redirects and other nonsense. I posted a message on their talk page and received this. Read the last sentence of their post: "Also, you can't tell me what to do. It's none of your business if I update a few pages. What are you gonna do, lynch me? You can't stop me! You just might as well give up". I believe we are dealing with someone who isn't here to edit and is here to just make problems. Would you mind taking it from here? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I also issued a manual final warning, but I have the feeling that this won't stop this user. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:37, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

After my final warning, the user responded and stated if blocked he/she will "just continue to make multiple accounts." I think a CU is now in order. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 22:59, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted on their talk page and will watch their edits. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:04, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But I AM here to make edits though! I'm not trying to cause any problems, unless your definition of a "problem" is harmlessly updating information and correting incorrect information. There's no need to overreact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CaptainHog (talk • contribs) 23:08, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody's over-reacting here. We're just insisting that you say where you got the information; that's a normal part of Wikipedia editing, and it's required, every time you add or change information. I will post some info on your talk page as to how to do it. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:13, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User is back to making the exact same changes on the exact same pages. I am reverting again, but this is becoming monotonous. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:44, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 05:04, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RE:Adding references can be easy

The references were already on the pages when I went to edit them. This is something you guys need to understand. It's like you added the references and didn't use them in the articles. CaptainHog (talk) 23:33, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What you could do in an instance like that is say so in your edit summary, or add the citation again. That way it's clear to other editors where you got the information. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:40, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User is just slapping citations on the same pages willy-nilly while making the same edits. User is citing a non-reliable source, even citing Wikipedia. Same edits, poor sources. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:47, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The one I looked at WSLC-FM, where he changed to 95,500 watts (100,000 with beam tilt) and changed the tower height to 598 meters. The info does indeed appear in the source provided (here) but the citation was added before the info box instead of with the data. Please double check the others. -- Diannaa (talk) 23:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that one I corrected, but the rest remain incorrect. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 00:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to do that. I will post again on his talk page now. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:28, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:49, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I cited some more sources in my new edits. I hope I have finally pleased you CaptainHog (talk) 03:32, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Neutralhomer is the radio expert - he can check and make sure these are reliable sources and that they actually back up the material you added. -- Diannaa (talk) 03:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

For someone who claims to be a "radio expert", he can't

1.) Realize that WSFF does in fact NOT broadcast in HD Radio (The official HD Radio site can confirm that)

2.) Realize That WJJS/WJJX hasn't had their Rhythmic CHR format in nearly three years. They are purely a CHR station.

3.) Can't tell the difference between Urban Contemporary and Urban ADULT Contemporary

4.) Realize that WSNV has dropped their Oldies format and is purely Classic Hits. I don't care how many times I used "Realize that."

I think I'm more of an expert than he claims to be. CaptainHog (talk) 03:54, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The HD Radio website is consistantly out of date, always has been. It's not a good source. WJJS/WJJX has carried a Rhythmic Contemporary Hit Radio format for years, still does. There is not difference between Urban Contemporary and Urban Adult Contemporary, none. WSNV still airs songs from the 60s and early 70s which fall under the Oldies category.

The "sources" you added were a radio board, a Wikipedia mirror, Wikipedia itself and the out of date HD Radio website. Sorry, but none of these are going to work. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 03:58, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

1.) Just because the HD Radio website is supposedly out of date doesn't automatically mean WSFF broadcasts in HD Radio. I actually have an HD Radio and I can tell you that WSFF doesn't broadcast in HD Radio. You can even contact someone who works for the station. 2.)WJJS/WJJX has dropped their Rhythmic format in 2012. It's evident by their playlist. 3.) The main difference between Urban Contemporary and Urban Adult contemporary is that Urban AC stations tend to stay away from recent popular hip hop/rap songs. 4.)I don't even care about WSNV, they've been going downhill. 5.) In the case of my recent WVTF edit, I got information from the station's damn website!!!

<personal attack removed> CaptainHog (talk) 04:21, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Admin's Barnstar
	For being calm under such situations. Silver Samurai 05:26, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lawal Musa Daura

Why do you keep deleting Lawal Musa Daura? There are numerous sites that now cover his appointment and there are only so many ways scant information can be presented. Information from the Punch is just one source. Even the State Security Service site has new information about him:https://dss.gov.ng/index.php/aboutus/leadership - pleas restore as I'm in the process of cleaning up the article.

Kunkuru (talk) 14:38, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All of the content is a copyright violation (it's been deleted three times for this reason). Please re-write from scratch, as I am unable to restore it. Sorry for the extra work. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's not correct Diannaa. I edited the article but you appear adamant about the copyright infringement. Did you see the updates I made? This is not in the Wikipedia spirit. A bit dissapointing. Kunkuru (talk) 03:41, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It was copied from here. -- Diannaa (talk) 05:13, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think your point about copying and pasting is noted however the updates me and others made corrected things. With proper attribution you shouldn't have deleted the article. If the NY TIMES publishes an article with the sentence "Kunkuru is a cat" and if Kunkuru is notable, there are only so many ways one can write about Kunkuru on Wikipedia. You erred in deleting the most recent version of Lawal Musa Daura.Kunkuru (talk) 12:41, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can appeal my decision at Wikipedia:Deletion review. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rather than get involved in an appeal I've created another Lawal Musa Daura article. Please re-read and note the accreditations before a carte blanche deletion. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kunkuru (talk • contribs) 16:20, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This new version is okay from a copyright point of view. Thanks for taking the time to do that. -- Diannaa (talk) 16:32, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ny (singer)

Hi there; earlier on, you deleted my article Ny (singer), I'm not mad, I knew it was pants, but I have re done it; can you please have a look and if there's anything that looks like rubbish can you please let me know what's wrong? Nikegirl2015 (talk) 21:19, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There's no problem with copyright in this version. Someone has nominated it for deletion on notability concerns, however. You can review the notability guideline for musicians at WP:BAND. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:25, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you; I'll add some more tomorrow εmmα ♥s her ✔s 21:39, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah; I added a pronunciation thingy for Ny can you see if I've done it right; if it's wrong please can you change it for me? εmmα ♥s her ✔s 21:50, 3 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Epeefleche CCI; seeking opinion on expansion

Hello, Diannaa. If you have opportunity, can you please review User talk:Epeefleche#Ongoing close paraphrasing concerns and consider whether you believe there is sufficient cause to expand the CCI? I've been looking especially in the last 30 days of edits, and I do see a lot of valid paraphrase, but also some close paraphrasing and limited copy-pasting. Thanks. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 21:07, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay,I will have a look and let you both know -- Diannaa (talk) 21:14, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removing park bmx

I didn't copy any of it and your removing it for copyright, fix It please Lucas sheekey (talk) 00:01, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It came from http://bmxhobbies.com/bmx-freestyle/park/ and no I will not put it back. Sorry, -- Diannaa (talk) 00:17, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Wild Asia’s Responsible Tourism Awards

Hey Dianna, First - thanks for the time and effort you take to make Wikipedia a better place.

I wrote the article "Wild Asia’s Responsible Tourism Awards" citing sources, and not using the same words (copy-pasting), but it seems it wasn't good enough.

I'm happy to change it, and I thought I will receive some input - but instead - it was just deleted - not taking into account the time I have spent in sincerely creating it.

Its so frustrating... I can't believe I've done this mistake and didn't save a copy of it on my computer. so... hours of work are gone...

Is it possible to recover what you deleted?

I must say that one source mentioned that I copied from - I haven't even looked at. The other source is where I took much info, and appreently I need to rewrite that section, which I will.

Thanks, Roi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roi.eco (talk • contribs) 08:30, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Roi.eco. The article consisted of two paragraphs. The first paragraph was almost identical to the first paragraph of this page, and the second paragraph was almost identical to the first paragraph of this page. It's not okay to post copyright material here, not even temporarily in a draft or sandbox while you work on it.

A second problem is notability. I am not sure the awards are notable enough, as Wikipedia defines it, to have an article. We require write-ups in reliable third party sources such as newpapers, magazines, or online publishers to establish notability. New articles on topics that are not notable are typically speedily deleted. I suggest that you begin again and write a new draft that does not closely paraphrase or copy the material available online. Even then, chances are that the article would be speedily deleted as not notable enough for an article. Sorry the reply could not be more favourable. Regards,-- Diannaa (talk) 13:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Motion passed in AE arbitration case granting amnesty and rescinding previous temporary injunction

This message is sent at 12:53, 5 July 2015 (UTC) by Arbitration Clerk User:Penwhale via MassMessage on behalf of the Arbitration Committee. You are receiving this message because your name appears on this list and have not elected to opt-out of being notified of development in the arbitration case.

On 5 July, 2015, the following motion was passed and enacted:

Paragraphs (2) and (3) of the Arbitration Committee's motion of 29 June 2015 about the injunction and reporting breaches of it are hereby rescinded.
The Arbitration Committee hereby declares an amnesty covering:
1. the original comment made by Eric Corbett on 25 June 2015 and any subsequent related comments made by him up until the enactment of this current motion; and
2. the subsequent actions related to that comment taken by Black Kite, GorillaWarfare, Reaper Eternal, Kevin Gorman, GregJackP and RGloucester before this case was opened on 29 June 2015.

Deletion of Vactruth.com

I am very confused. I received a message that the deletion was overruled but I find it has been deleted anyway. I followed all of the guidelines and the rules so I could use a clarification on the problem with the article. It is no different than the naturalnews.com wiki entry.(Everyoneshouldknow (talk) 07:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)). Can you guide me in the appeal process or how the article can be modified to your satisfaction?[reply]

The material was deleted twice, by two different admins, as an attack page. I don't think that leaves much wiggle room. -- Diannaa (talk) 14:01, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

82.71.230.203

User:82.71.230.203 - I suspect you'll want to re-block? 81.141.41.56 (talk) 14:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker)

Done. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 14:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Notice of edit warring policy

I'm not trying to start an editing war. I just updated/corrected some pages and User:Neutralhomer started changing them back. So HE was the one that started the editing war. As for the "unsourced changes", if it's possible, I can send you or User:Neutralhomer photographic proof that what my edits are correct.

@@ Line 223: / Line 223: @@
 [[User:82.71.230.203]] - I suspect you'll want to re-block? [[Special:Contributions/81.141.41.56|81.141.41.56]] ([[User talk:81.141.41.56|talk]]) 14:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 :{{tps}}{{done}}. --[[User:Moonriddengirl|Moonriddengirl]] <sup>[[User talk:Moonriddengirl|(talk)]]</sup> 14:45, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
+==RE: Notice of edit warring policy==
+I'm not trying to start an editing war. I just updated/corrected some pages and [[User:Neutralhomer]] started changing them back. So HE was the one that started the editing war. As for the "unsourced changes", if it's possible, I can send you or [[User:Neutralhomer]] photographic proof that what my edits are correct.