|
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.
|
 Archives |
|
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 16 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Hours of Operation
In general, I check in with Wikipedia frequently between 12:00 and 23:00 Coordinated Universal Time. When you loaded this page, it was 23:26, 4 October 2024 UTC [refresh]. Refresh your page to see what time it is now.
Hi, lol My War of the Independents page was deleted again and I received over 50 emails from fans concerning it this morning. I'm a little concerned about what's happening. May I have it restored again please. Thanks! DavidWilliamRyan (talk) 12:20, 11 May 2010 (UTC) Dave davidwryan2002@yahoo.com[reply]
- Hi. I'm sorry, but this time I can't help you. I explained to you when I restored it that the article would almost certainly be nominated for deletion through a different process (User talk:Moonriddengirl/Archive 21#War of the Independents). It has now been deleted by community consensus and cannot be recreated without resolving the issues that led to its deletion. While deletion debates that have been closed incorrectly may be challenged (See Wikipedia:Deletion policy#Deletion review), this one was pretty clear cut and will probably not be overturned. The debate took place here, and I did suggest you might want to keep an eye on the article. It was tagged for a full week with notice of the debate to allow all interested contributors to weigh in with reason why it should be deleted or retained, but unfortunately the only people who responded to that notice agreed that deletion was the proper outcome.
- While the content may be retrievable at some point as the basis for a new article, it is not likely to be accepted on Wikipedia without substantial third party coverage verifying that the book meets notability guidelines. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:32, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
See [1]. This site is full of copyvio, whole newspaper articles, journal articles as pdfs, etc. Dougweller (talk) 14:22, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Yikes! So it is. I grabbed one at random (Merhotepre Ini) and find it links to [2]. No reason whatsoever to believe that this content is licensed. :/ Some of it does seem to be PD. I may not have time to help out with this too much at the moment, as I'm getting ready for a two week wiki break starting Thursday. It might be worth raising this on WP:ELN? Perhaps contributors there would help with cleanup? If the ratio of copyvio to PD is unacceptably high, User:XLinkBot might be at least a good starting point. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:06, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I was thinking what a good idea, then I realised that these aren't external links. I think XLinkBot is appropriate here, as the site itself is the problem, I don't think we should link to the site even if it has some PD stuff, what say you? Dougweller (talk) 15:40, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, maybe clean up first and then XLinkbot? Dougweller (talk) 15:41, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm inclined to agree that we need caution. XLinkBot will only block unconfirmed and unregistered accounts, but I'm not sure if the ratio of copyvio is sufficient to warrant blacklisting the site from use by everyone. And cleanup can go either way; XLinkBot doesn't concern itself with what's already there, only what's newly added. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:46, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Are you suggesting the site is ok as a convenience link? I can't see how this site is an RS, it's just a bunch of links and stored articles -- and is described in a number of places as a "Scientologist site on democracy and political philosophy". You can't actually get into the site so far as I can tell. Dougweller (talk) 16:20, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't know; I haven't had time to look at it, so I don't know what's going on with it other than the one link that I followed and a few that looked to be US gov. If it seems completely unusable, the blacklist may be better than XLinkBot. It's meant for spam, but I know copyright problem sites have been listed before. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:41, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
i just wanted to say i think your user page is pretty cool. i think its nice how you review people's edits and everything. Decora (talk) 19:18, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! Some people have very pretty user pages, but I'm afraid my talents don't go that way. :) I try mostly to keep mine informative. Sometimes it's more fun writing articles of my own than reviewing other people's edits, but at least I learn a lot. And it's not so different than how I started. When I first decided to contribute to Wikipedia, I didn't know what to write about, so I would just hit "random article" and contribute to whatever I found! --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:22, 11 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi,
Somewhere, I formed the impression that you are an expert on issues, especially attribution, that arise when copying material form another article. If I’m wrong, feel free to ignore this request.
An editor posted a question at the Help desk on this subject. I misread the question at first, but after I understood the question, I attempted to answer. However, neither the person asking nor I feel I gave a complete answer. I think that, other than merge, split or transwiki issues, the answer is to use the Summary Style, and never to wholesale copy and paste, but I’m hoping someone with more experience in this area can give a more definitive answer.
Enjoy your Holiday.--SPhilbrickT 17:48, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- (talk page stalker) Answered at the help desk and will watch there in case there are further questions for this topic. VernoWhitney (talk) 18:07, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:28, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
What isn't OR in this 100Kb article is plagiarised from the subject's books. Now although he died in 1951, his books have been re-translated recently, eg this one [3] which has been copied to use in the article. As a translation, isn't it a fresh copyright? If it is, I think the best thing is just to stub it, it's just an OR textbook right now on his works anyway. I don't think anyone can go through the article just dealing with the copyvio stuff if I'm right about it still being in copyright. Dougweller (talk) 19:13, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- (talk page stalker) I'll just give a short answer regarding the copyright issues, as I don't feel like digging into the rest of the article. Yes, a fresh translation has a fresh copyright, as well as the copyright issues regarding derivative works from the original publication. VernoWhitney (talk) 19:34, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Moonriddengirl I am राम प्रसाद जोशी from Nepal. My old acount is blocked at http://ne.wikipedia.org so that I open a new acount. My new user name is User:राम प्रसाद जोशी. I want make my old user page (User:Rameshti) and old talk page (User talk:Rameshti) to new user page (User:राम प्रसाद जोशी) but I can not move this page. please help me.
--राम प्रसाद जोशी (talk) 04:30, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Moonriddengirl is currently away. I have moved your question to your talk page and added the help template. The template is used to request assistance. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 20:01, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've rewrote again, its allot shorter but avoids paraphrasing this time. If you have any free time, please have a quick look at it. Thanks, once again. And have a nice holiday :) Acather96 (talk) 19:18, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi,Acather96. Thanks for reworking the article. I made a couple small tweaks to the text, but it looks to be free of copyvios now. Cheers. — CactusWriter | needles 03:12, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Enjoy your vaka ! I rewrote the two sections you flagged on the John Andrew Rea piece, and dropped citations in for the website and the Port of Takoma newsletter. Can you take a look when you return? Thanks! --Cmagha (talk) 00:50, 16 May 2010 (UTC) Cmagha.[reply]
- Unfortunately, the John Andrew Rea page you have recreated is essentially the same article deleted by Moonriddengirl last week. Even specific language cited during the talk page discussion at that time remains in the article. (fx: one of the most colorful characters ever to walk the sidewalks of Tacoma. He dressed flamboyantly in a cutaway suit and white fedora, with a black bow tie and a rose in his lapel. For 50 years he strode daily from his home on North Fiftieth Street to his real estate office in the Perkins Building. is copied from [4]). I'm sorry, but because of this, it is necessary to delete the page again as a copyright violation. If you wish to create a page for Rea, I would suggest you work one up in your user space by rewriting the article without use of any copyrighted language. Then request a reading before moving the article into the mainspace. If you have further questions, please feel free to ask me. — CactusWriter | needles 02:37, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this note because of your participation in WT:Revision deletion#Community consultation, which is referred to in Wikipedia:VPR#Proposal to turn on revision deletion immediately (despite some lingering concerns). –xenotalk 14:15, 17 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Offline potential copyvio discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parten's classic study of play. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 02:42, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- In Moonriddengirl's absence, I took a look. Yes, the article is a copyright violation. I've tagged it and left a comment at the Afd. — CactusWriter | needles 06:08, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also for you. ^_^ SilverserenC 04:35, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated CP Gurnani, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CP Gurnani. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. UtherSRG (talk) 12:35, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi
Another question- I am not sure about this one - is List of former chairmen of Cambridge University Conservative Association a copy vio of [5] - I think not but wanted to check.
Codf1977 (talk) 18:26, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- (talk page stalker) No, a list of facts in chronological order can't be copyrighted. See also Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service. Theleftorium (talk) 18:36, 20 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My name is David McElroy and I work with Stephen Auerbach, a filmmaker here in Los Angeles. I created his page and added a bio, which he gave me (perhaps from his own webpage). However, I was told you took it down. Why is that? I even added a note explaining that we have permission to use his bio, seeing how he's the one that created it. Can you please un-delete it and then email me back at superdavit@hotmail.com
Thanks for your help.
David McElroy —Preceding unsigned comment added by Superdavit (talk • contribs) 22:28, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- (talk page stalker) It was deleted because you provided no verifiable proof that permission was granted, only your statement. You need to follow the steps at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials in order to provide verifiable permission before the page can be undeleted. VernoWhitney (talk) 23:00, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
[6] Not sure how good it is, though. MER-C 13:18, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I was wondering if you could please provide me with some direction on how to restore a large amount of content and images that were deleted in 2009 in the article about the College of Mount St. Joseph. I see now that some of the images I uploaded were missing copyright tags and that permissions needed to be specified for content that was similar to copy found on various subpages of www.msj.edu. Now that I am aware of this, I will be happy to take these steps and any others that would allow the deleted material to be restored in accordance with Wikipedia's policies. Could you please let me know how to proceed from here? Thanks! Cliffwjenkins (talk) 13:21, 26 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
