Jump to content

User talk:Coren

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 89.253.74.52 (talk) at 18:20, 26 October 2014 (→‎false positives). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives
2015
JanFebMar
AprMayJun
JulAugSep
OctNovDec
2016
JanFebMar
AprMayJun
JulAugSep
OctNovDec

Help with your advice

Dear CorenSearchBot,

I am new to Wikipedia and have made this article - ‘Balkrishna’ today. This is to bring in your kind knowledge that the earlier page – ‘balkrishna’ was also made by me. some days back but it was speedily deleted under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, with which I understood that this section means that the Article creator should give credibility to the living person on whose name the particular page is created , which I did not give in my last article(‘balkrishna’), hence this time when I made the page again with similar name –‘Balkrishna’, I thoroughly followed Section A7 guidelines of giving credibility to the person and hence added ‘Major Works’ done by ‘Balkrishna’ in my article which I made today. I had added ‘Major Works’ section only in new article to follow Section A7 as that was the only reason provided to me for speedy deletion but did not change the first two lines of the earlier Article(balkrishna) in my new article(Balkrishna) that is – ‘Balkrishna' is the Acharya of Ayurveda and companion of Yoga Guru Baba Ramdev. The birthday of Balkrishna(4th August), having knowledge of Ayurvedic medicines and herbs , is being celebrated as ‘Jadi Booti Divas’ ‘ , because these lines were not the reason for deletion.

Also I did not change the line in the critic section of my earlier page(balkrishna) , in newly created page(Balkrishna) which was – ‘there is also some controversies associated with him, which had raised questions on his Indian citizenship and academic certificates ‘ because these lines also were not reason for deletion

Hence you will find these three lines, in my newly made page on ‘Balkrishna’ which I made today, similar to my previously made article/page –‘balkrishna’ just because these lines were not reason for deletion. I would request you to please do not delete my Article/page –‘Balkrishna’ and please provide me your invaluable guidance to make me understand as where I had lacked and what should I do so that I can correct it as soon as possible . I will sincerely follow your advice, and will try to understand and implement each and every guidance of yours.Shaliniaggrawal (talk) 13:34, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Help with moving/renaming/redirecting

Hi there, I’ve created an identical page for "Pension investment in private equity" with the proper title = non-capitalized first letters, but I can't delete nor move/redirect the old one... Can you please help? Thanks in advance BJA

--B.Andersohn (talk


I've used the #REDIRECT Pension investment in private equity function. Seems to works. Thanks for your help B.Andersohn (talk

false positives

Your bot that detects copyvios recently flagged an article I originally drafted on another wiki, and ported here.

Just so you know, Wikialpha.org's default license is public domain. The exception is material ported there from the wikipedia. The site has a tool for porting wikipedia articles, which automatically takes a snapshot of the article's revision history. That snapshot is copied into the article's talk page. So the contribution history is preserved. The WMF lawyers position is that a mere list of contributors is sufficient attribution. Everyone else who copies wikimedia material seems to have gone along with this.

Personally, I am skeptical, but IANAL.

Anyhow, if I had ported material someone else contributed, that was "free", but required attribution, I would provide that attribution.

But when I am the author, I didn't think that was necessary. Do you disagree? Geo Swan (talk) 03:25, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's true insofar as nobody else edited it after you wrote it because then it becomes a derived work on which both hold copyright (hence the necessity of an implicit license and attribution); but if I were you I'd still attribute your own material if only because that clarifies exactly what happened to onlookers. — Coren (talk) 16:36, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Found a technical false positive: Togbe Afede. Presumably not in copyright violation given that it seems self-promotional in nature. 89.253.74.52 (talk) 18:20, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John Hartnell

The article is not completely copied from [1]. Much of what is written in the article is not from this site — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mirno (talkcontribs) 17:07, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]