User talk:VED sur seine

October 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. However, I noticed that your username (OECD Development Centre) may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it appears to represent the entity you're writing about. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username, or you may simply create a new account to use for editing. Thank you. 99.168.81.210 (talk) 11:33, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only you. You should also read our conflict of interest guideline. If your username doesn't represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice. Thank you. JohnCD (talk) 11:40, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

VED sur seine (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

per request on my talk page

Accept reason:

to change username. Please make a request at WP:CHU as soon as possible to avoid a re-block, requesting a new username which represents only you as an individual. Read down to the bottom of that page and click on "Simple". There is a link here to check whether your choice is already taken. JohnCD (talk) 12:43, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand that Wikipedia is not like Myspace and other sites where people and organizations write about themselves. That is one of the reasons why usernames which appear to be names of groups or organizations are not permitted - accounts must be for individuals only, who are personally responsible for them.

Even with an individual username, in editing about the OECD Development Centre you will have, from Wikipedia's point of view, a WP:Conflict of interest, and should read carefully that policy and also WP:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.

You may find User:JohnCD/Not a noticeboard helpful.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 12:49, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I've made the request and suppose i just need to wait now. I understand Wikipedia is not like Myspace and Facebook, but I do feel it is important for people and organisations to be abl eto write about themselves, in a sense ensuring the public is getting th elatest information. Notice we're not deleting what anyone has to say, but updating pre-existing information. :In any case, thank you again for unblocking the account, and I hope we won't have any problems in the future.

Best regardsOECD Development Centre (talk) 12:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have been unblocked for the sole purpose of requesting a name change. You should not take advantage of the unblock to do other editing. Also, no matter what user name you use, you should be cautious about editing where you may be considered to have a conflict of interest. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:05, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I unblocked and requested my name change, which is exactly what I did. The name change has not yet come through, but the only edit I made was to remove a copy/paste copyright warning since there were no copy/pastes made. I have been very patient waiting for my name change request to come through. Please also notice that what you claim to be copyright infringement are links that have been up for many years, since the initial creation of the page in 2008. The second link you state as copyright infringement was not created nor posted by me. I would suggest that in the future if you spot material that presents a potential risk of copyright infringement you delete the link or refuse the change and alert the person who made the edit instead of deleting the page, depriving the public of the information entirely.

N.B. Since starting this statement I now see that my name change request has come through. You may now contact me at VED_sur_seineOECD Development Centre (talk) 15:56, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, "Coufeyrac" is already taken, you will have to try again. If you like the name, you could try "Coufeyrac2", or any numerals at the end.

People are able to edit about their organizations, but under fairly severe constraint - basically, make directly only changes which are factual and absolutely uncontroversial, for anything else suggest on the talk page and see if others agree. The reason is that experience shows that people with a COI find it extraordinarily hard not to write with a promotional intent and style, and Wikipedia has to fight a continual battle against spammers and self-promoters in order not to become just a super-Myspace. JohnCD (talk) 13:31, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I'll try another name. For the fairly severe constraint, that is exactly what i planned on adhering to. If you look at the page you will see that it is filled with only factual information. I'm not editing the page to advertise the Organisation, but just to make sure people get the proper and most up to date facts. Thanks again OECD Development Centre (talk) 15:10, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that right from its inception most of the article was lifted directly from the agency's website. Without any third party sources to support its content it was therefore subject to scrutiny for copyright and promotional issues. Any Wikipedia article must be based upon objective sources, per WP:RELIABLE. Thank you, 99.168.81.210 (talk) 16:36, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A large proportion of the article, right from the first version created on 3 August 2006 (not, as you say, 2008), was copied from various web pages, such as http://www.oecd.org/document/61/0,3746,en_2649_33731_1899645_1_1_1_1,00.html. That page has a notice saying "© OECD. All rights reserved", and a link labelled "terms and conditions" to http://www.oecd.org/document/0,3746,en_2649_201185_1899066_1_1_1_1,00.html. That page says, amongst other things, "You can copy, download or print content for your own use, and you can also include excerpts from OECD publications, databases and multimedia products in your own documents, presentations, blogs, websites and teaching materials, provided that suitable acknowledgment of OECD as source and copyright owner is given. You should cite the Title of the material, © OECD, publication year (if available) and page number or URL (uniform resource locator) as applicable. All requests for commercial use and translation rights should be submitted to rights@oecd.org. Requests for permission to photocopy OECD material in the United States must be obtained through the Copyright Clearance Centre, Inc. (CCC), Customer Service, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 USA, Fax: (978)750-4343, E-mail: info@copyright.com. For all other countries permission to photocopy OECD material must be obtained through the Centre Français d'exploitation du droit de copie (CFC), 20 rue des Grands Augustins, 75006 Paris, FRANCE Fax: (33-1) 01 46 34 67 19, E-mail: contact@cfcopies.com." That allows fairly wide reuse conditions, but it falls far short of making the material available for free reuse by anyone in the world, without further permission, for commercial or other use, including photocopying, and so it is not compatible with the terms under which Wikipedia content is made available. Anyone who posts such material to Wikipedia is therefore infringing copyright. I have given one of the pages from which material was copied, but similar remarks apply to other material. I never delete an article as a copyright infringement without first checking the history of the article, to see whether it is possible to salvage an earlier version from before the copyright infringing material was added. In this case, unfortunately, there was copyright violating material in every version of the article, right from the first posting. It is possible to remove some versions of an article's history from the publicly visible archives while leaving other versions, but it is unfortunately not possible to remove parts of a particular version and leave other parts of it. Contrary to what you say, the copyright infringing material was not "links", it was substantial bodies of text. The fact that the copyright infringement has escaped notice for several years does not make it any less important to remove it. If I were to knowingly leave copyright violations in place I would personally be responsible for a breach of the law, as well as putting the Wikimedia Foundation in a bad position. There is no question of my deliberately breaking the law by republishing material which I know it is illegal for me to publish here. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:37, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

2008 was when the page was deleted due to "Blatent advertising," which was proven false and the page was undeleted. You correctly mention the OECD copyright, and on your profile page you state that "When dealing with new users I am a very strong believer in avoiding the use of opaque acronyms. Yes, it takes longer to type "conflict of interest" than "WP:COI", or "the notability guideline for people" than "WP:BIO", but if the purpose is to help the editor, not simply to dismiss them, it is worth the effort," yet in this case I feel you simply stated copyright infringement with no reference or explanation, thus dismissing and punishing me as an editor, others who have contributed to the page as well as those looking for information on this page. I'm guessing you had not noticed the most recent edits which demonstrate that text was changing and was moving further away from anything that could be considered a copy/paste, thus removing copyrighted material. I feel that, in essence, you prevented editors from addressing and correcting your concerns and observations - basically saying, "you need to fix that, but I won't give you the opportunity to do so." Now better understanding the reason why you deleted the page, since I did not notice an explanation before, I would be very appreciative, as I'm sure many others would be too, if you would undelete the page and allow me to finish the work that was started: changing and/or removing copyrighted material, which should satisfy your concerns. It's true that I could recreate the page in its entirety, but I would rather take advantage of the code that has already been created. I understand if you don't wish to repost copyrighted material, even if it is only briefly, so would you have any suggestions to avoid this? Being relatively new to Wikipedia I did notice the Sandbox, but haven't had the time to look into it much. If I understand its purpose correctly from the very brief glance I had, it's for testing things. Could the page be potentially recreated in the sandbox, giving me the opportunity to edit it as needed? Or do you have any other ideas that you could share, please? Thank you. VED sur seine (talk) 15:55, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(Answering for JamesBWatson, as I am watching this page) We can't host copyright material even temporarily, even in a sandbox; but I have emailed you the text of the deleted article. Please read WP:Close paraphrasing - minor rewording or rearrangement is not enough. Good advice at WP:Your first article and WP:Writing better articles. Even without the copyright issue, the organization's own material is not often suitable for an encyclopedia article, as it tends to use "peacock terms" like "unique", and often (though I haven't looked back at this one) goes into unencyclopedic levels of detail which are not of interest to the general encyclopedia reader and are better handled by a link to the website. Also, establishing notability requires showing references to significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources.

See Help:Userspace draft for how to start an article in your own user space, so that you can take time developing it, and avoid the risk of premature deletion by not moving it to the main encyclopedia until it is ready. JohnCD (talk) 16:18, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks infinitely much. For me, you're a godsend.

Hello VED sur seine, and what a terrible shock it was that the WP volunteer JamesBWatson had speedily deleted the article OECD Development Centre, without any warning to me.

And then, what a godsend it was to see that you had already informed him on his Talk page that OECD webpages are not copyrighted! Please see my Talk page for my response, requesting speedy un-deletion of the article.

I hope that you (or whoever) can in fact help me maintain the article. Updating it has been a high priority for me for months already, but I am fighting for time to do it, and may not get it done for years... Doing my best is the best I can do, and it's not good enough.(!*!) I have not checked the article for more than a year, say (I don't remember), so I'm looking forward to seeing it again, after it's restored.

Good luck to us all, For7thGen (talk) 20:47, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Le Centre de développement de l’OCDE

Welcome, and thank you for contributing the page Le Centre de développement de l’OCDE to Wikipedia. While you have added the page to the English version of Wikipedia, the article is not in English. We invite you to translate it into English. It has been listed at Pages Needing Translation, but if it is not translated within two weeks, the article will be listed for deletion. Thank you.

Bienvenu(e), et merci de votre contribution de la page Le Centre de développement de l’OCDE à Wikipédia. Bien que vous ayez introduit cette page à la version anglaise de Wikipédia, elle n'est pas en anglais et elle a donc été ajoutée à la liste des pages en besoin de traduction. Nous vous invitons à la traduire vous-même, mais si elle n'est pas traduite d'ici deux semaines, on proposera sa suppression. Merci. NeemNarduni2 (talk) 11:35, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I see that this is a translation of OECD Development Centre. Could you please copy it to French Wikipedia, where it belongs? (https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_Centre_de_développement_de_l’OCDE) Thanks! NeemNarduni2 (talk) 11:36, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your contributed article, Le Centre de développement de l’OCDE

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

Hello, I noticed that you recently created a new page, Le Centre de développement de l’OCDE. First, thank you for your contribution; Wikipedia relies solely on the efforts of volunteers such as you. Unfortunately, the page you created covers a topic on which we already have a page – OECD Development Centre. Because of the duplication, your article has been tagged for speedy deletion. Please note that this is not a comment on you personally and we hope you will continue helping to improve Wikipedia. If the topic of the article you created is one that interests you, then perhaps you would like to help out at OECD Development Centre – you might like to discuss new information at the article's talk page.

If you think the article you created should remain separate, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Additionally if you would like to have someone review articles you create before they go live so they are not nominated for deletion shortly after you post them, allow me to suggest the article creation process and using our search feature to find related information we already have in the encyclopedia. Try not to be discouraged. Wikipedia looks forward to your future contributions. Bazj (talk) 12:20, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

English please

Nous vous prions de ne pas ajouter de texte en français à la version anglophone de Wikipédia. Par contre, vos contributions en français sont bienvenues sur la Wikipédia francophone. Please do not contribute text in French to English Wikipedia. Your contributions are more than welcome at French Wikipedia. Bazj (talk) 12:24, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, VED sur seine. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Le Centre de développement de l’OCDE, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. Thank you. Bazj (talk) 12:25, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Non-free rationale for File:OECD Development Centre Logo.jpeg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:OECD Development Centre Logo.jpeg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:41, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:OECD Development Centre Logo.jpeg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:OECD Development Centre Logo.jpeg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 21:08, 22 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]