Jump to content

User talk: Diannaa

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JayMeydad (talk | contribs) at 10:31, 31 August 2017 (→‎Removal of Public Transportation Statistics Data - user: JayMeydad). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


 Skip to the bottom  ⇩  ·

Where this user is, it is 7:20 am, 14 August 2024 UTC [refresh].

Please verify edits prior to tagging for copyright . Removing the entire Corporate History where there was no copyright violation is excessive and abusive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjkoncur (talkcontribs) 13:43, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The material was was copied unaltered from http://taylorstrategy.com/about, and was therefore a copyright violation. The page is marked at the bottom as "Taylor 2017 ©". — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:48, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please provide insight for why you edit down to https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Taylor_(company)&oldid=796088849 as opposed to other company listings that are not flagged (for example) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edelman_(firm) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjkoncur (talkcontribs) 14:23, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. All content needs to be sourced. Please see Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources for more information about sourcing. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:08, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jesus ben Ananias 2

IP copied and pasted content from the following link: http://www.jcrelations.net/Transformations+in+Telling+the+Passion+Story.2191.0.html?L=3 Copyright from 2010. Could you please delete it, thank you. You've also recently deleted copyright violation from the same IP in the article recently. — JudeccaXIII (talk) 02:58, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:36, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ettore Sottsass

Dear Diannaa, I understand very well, i thought citations would be enough to avoid plagiarism problems. Best, Philippe49730--Philippe49730 (talk) 08:57, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dianna there is a discussion going on here: Wikipedia talk:Non-free content regarding two flag files that were originally uploaded by an author who released his based upon versions under Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication they were wrongly assessed as a copyright infringement against CRW Flags.I have since found an official source showing the actual flags here: here these are under the OGL V3 licence UK as part of that website can you take a look and give some feed back I also wanted to know can we use the images from the official site or what would be the best way forward so we can have an image or at least correct flag image for these articles Navy Board and Admiralty Board.--Navops47 (talk) 13:09, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note on the copyright of content on the Macduff Lifeboat Station page.

I am authorised to use this content as I wrote some of it for the RNLI. The RNLI allows the use of its content for education and promotion. If you wish to contact me about this you can email me at (Redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike Rawlins (talkcontribs) 19:27, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Rawlins: Thank you for your interest in working on wikipedia. However, you cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder or have their permission, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:40, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of one of my subpages

Diannaa, why did you delete User:Flyer22/Pine Valley (All My Children)? Sure, I haven't gotten around to recreating that article, but I don't see why the subpage needed to be deleted, especially when my other subpages still exist. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 06:12, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Flyer22 Reborn. I deleted it because it appeared at the list of broken userspace redirects at User:AnomieBOT III/Broken redirects/Userspace. If you want it back that's no problem. Alternatively I could restore User:Flyer22 Reborn/Pine Valley (All My Children) which was also recently deleted. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:13, 19 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alavi Bohras

Hello sir, I have created a gallery in Alavi Bohras page, but could not add new images. After uploading new ones it doesn't get displayed as a result it couldn't be fetched in the gallery. Please explain... Thanks.--NoorAlavi (talk) 04:52, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When adding to a gallery, don't wikilink the photo, don't ask it to align right, and don't make it a thumbnail. All images should be listed between the opening gallery mark-up and the closing gallery mark-up. Here's what I did to fixDiannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:34, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Near-death experience page

Hello Diannaa, I seek your advice with respect to an issue I am facing on the near death experience. I undid one of the recent edits and asked the editor to take it to the Talk page see [1] and he refused (see [2]) and this despite the fact that information from a review article (ref name=Parnia2014rev) is completely lost in the edit he made. Given that this is edit war, what is the best course of action please? should I re-undo the edit and slap an edit war template on the person's talk page ? Josezetabal (talk) 06:33, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see the other editor has already opened a discussion on the talk page. That's the first step in any dispute resolution: Discuss on the talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:36, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Information deleted from my draft

Hi Diannaa, thanks for reviewing my draft (Draft:Halsey Institute of Contemporary Art). All of the work that I had put in for two weeks has been deleted due to copyrighting issues. While I understand how serious it is, I now have nothing to work off of to fix my mistakes. Is there any way I can see that information again to work from? I worked so hard on my research and would like to correct my errors. Thank you. Kt161 (talk) 13:41, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can send you a copy by email if you like, but first you will have to activate your Wikipedia email. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:06, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Mastiksoul page

Hi Diannaa, thank you for reviewing Mastiksoul's page. I will definitely make sure to license our text, given that his biography is taken from his own page, which we own. Would you recommend us doing this, or just paraphrasing instead? Please note I am Mastiksoul's label (4Kenzo Recordings) manager. In either case, is there any way we can please remove the redirecting from Mastiksoul's page to a "Only Love" Shaggy remix page in the meantime? There is absolutely no reason why when somebody looks Mastiksoul up on Wikipedia, it would lead to a song that he once remixed... Thanks! 4kenzo (talk) 14:09, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The content you added was both a copyright violation and "horribly promotional" to quote the person who initially removed it. So I recommend that you not bother with getting the material compatibly licensed as it would not be accepted for publication in its present state. Also, the article was deleted via the articles for deletion process, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mastiksoul (2nd nomination), which means that in May it was determined that he's not notable enough at this time to qualify for an article. The article will speedily be deleted again unless his situation has changed a lot in the meantime.
A second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:26, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, understood, thank you for elaborating. Can you please explain then why there is a Mastiksoul page on the French Wikipedia, where he is apparently "notable enough"? If I try to submit a page on the Portuguese Wikipedia, will he be "notable enough"? I'm confused as to why the criteria is different or interpreted differently in different languages. Also, could you please reply to the second part of my original question, regarding whether it is possible for us to remove this 'redirection' to a page that has pretty much nothing to do with him, please? Thanks! 4kenzo (talk) 14:48, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) Each language Wikipedia is independent and has different policies and guidelines. The redirect can be discussed/deleted via WP:RFD. — JJMC89(T·C) 18:33, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Also, please let me add that he has definitely "had a single or album on any country's national music chart" (Portuguese music charts) as is a condition under the artist eligibility criteria... so I am confused as to why he was determined not notable enough at this time to qualify for an article. Please elaborate. Thank you! 4kenzo (talk) 16:27, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page watcher) The guidelines at WP:MUSICBIO only suggest that someone may may be notable. There still needs to be sufficient independent, reliable sources to satisfy WP:GNG, which is why the article was deleted. — JJMC89(T·C) 18:33, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Books and Bytes - Issue 23

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 23, June-July 2017

  • Library card
  • User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Spotlight: Combating misinformation, fake news, and censorship
  • Bytes in brief

Chinese, Arabic and Yoruba versions of Books & Bytes are now available in meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:04, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for advising about copyright issues. I deleted the page my self. Gcastellanos (talk) 02:14, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Neurologic Music Therapy (NMT)

Dear Diannaa,

Thank you for your information regarding copyright concerns for Neurologic music therapy (NMT) pages. I am actually working on editing this page on bahalf of Drs. Thaut (Michael and Corene Thaut) who is a founder of NMT. I discuss with Drs. Thaut about the contents and texts before I edit. In case I worked with them for this pages, I am wondering that I still violate the rule/policy of wikipedia regarding the copyright. Thank you so much! Kyurim1 (talk) 15:35, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your interest in working on wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.
The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:15, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) Just noting that Alexbrn posted the same CoI message there a few weeks ago.—Odysseus1479 23:01, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I will remove the duplicate message, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:08, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft: High Watch Recovery Center

Hi Diannaa,

Thank you very much for flagging the possible copyright violations. I have made changes that (I think) address your concerns.

Specifically, I added back some of what you removed from the New Milford Spectrum in a manner I believe is proper. I also left out the references to highwatchrecovery.com, as you had done.

I hope this addresses your concerns and if not, please let me know.

Best regards,

Jason

I found and removed some copyvio. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:18, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I changed the word "facility" to "structure" ... I hope that is consistent with your goal avoiding a copyvio. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasonperillo (talkcontribs) 02:32, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Advice about copyvios and paraphrasing from primary (published) source

Hi Diannaa, I need your opinion and advice on copyvios on the Rene Guenon article (I see that you are working on copyright cleanup).

The old version of the article (see here) included many copyvios (from the published English translation of Guenon's works) and paraphrasing from the same primary source. This was discussed many times: for example here, and here. One admin even complained to editor TwoHorned that he was reinserting the copyvios after he removed them [3].

The editor (User:TwoHorned) responsible for inserting the copyvios again and again was blocked, but now a new editor has started gradually making partial reverts to reinsert the copyvios section by section.

If you look at the old version, here, with the exception of the Biography and the Reception section, all other sections include as their (almost) only source lengthy quotes, text and paraphrasing from the same primary source (English translation of Guenon's works).

In the current version, this is the case for example in the section Metaphysical core and in the section Other_writings_in_metaphysics.2C_hermeticism_and_cosmological_sciences. In these two sections, almost everything is quoted and paraphrased from the same primary source.

The new editor (Unamroma (talk · contribs)) wants to keep the copyvios in the article, and is continuing re-inserting more of the copyvios from previous versions of the article.

I need to know if I am correct that they should be removed and not re-inserted. Thanks..--Dekacarandaebonelm (talk) 19:02, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Dekacarandaebonelm, as already mentioned in the talk page, please underline the excerpts that you believe to be copyvios. I have already checked many of your vandal edits are not justified by copyvio argument. I will be analyzing them with you if you just indicate these passages. Unamroma (talk) 20:54, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Dekacarandaebonelm: I suspect you are correct but the case is beyond the scope of what I am prepared to handle at the moment. I suggest you list the article for cleanup at WP:CP. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:24, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Diannaa. Thank you for the information about copyrights. I am new to Wikipedia. I have received permission from the source to use its written materials from the pages you highlighted. I have sent that correspondence to permissions-en. Can you please share with me what the next steps are to return my edits to the page? Many thanks.

108.32.63.122 (talk) 20:27, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the content was copied from a webpage belonging to the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and some from a McGowan Institute web page. I think you'd better wait for the OTRS team to process your permission email. Another option is to re-write your additions in your own words instead of copying from the corporate web pages. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:32, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, again. The OTRS team has noted the permission received on the McGowan Institute for Regenerative Medicine talk page. Will I be able to make edits now, or is there something else that I need to do? Many thanks for your help. 108.32.63.122 (talk) 19:39, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You can re-add content but only from the web page noted on the OTRS ticket. Please make sure you provide attribution, as described at Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Copying material from free sourcesDiannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:21, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I hope I have it correct now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ga2wan2 (talkcontribs) 18:25, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Jean-Pierre Dupuy

Hi. I see in the articles Jean-Pierre Dupuy, Sébastien Balibar, and others, you included material translated from the French Wikipedia. That's okay, but you have to give attribution so that our readers are made aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself. I've added the attribution for this particular instance. Please make sure that you follow this legal requirement when copying from compatibly-licensed material in the future. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:23, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Template:Notification Hi, please just tell me how should I mention the item is translated from French to English. I did translation from en to fr quite often and e have the following mention in French items : * Template:Traduction/Référence. Is it the same with English Wikipedia?--JCL16 (talk) 13:36, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Just to be sure I followed now the legal reqs when translating : after having translated Jean-Pierre Dupuy and Sébastien Balibar full articles (i.e. new biographies articles), I've also add a missing section to an existing English bio (Jean-Baptiste Waldner). As you did, I've mentioned in the history summary "adding 'Nanocomputers and swarm intelligence' missing section - translated form french Wikipedia". Is that correct ? Thanks for any advice, I'm quite new on en.wikipedia and not yet familiar with all the procedures--JCL16 (talk) 14:52, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@JCL16: There's two things you need to do: (1) State in your edit summary that the material was copied and where you got it. Here is a sample edit summary. (2) Optional: Place a {{translated page}} template on the article talk page at the destination article. Here is a sample template. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:04, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thanks for the advices. I will complete the articles according them.--JCL16 (talk) 06:53, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish Civil War & appologies

Hello Diannaa! I'm sorry if the "Jesterday" joke-attempt wasn't funny. (However a nice linguist explained the Y/J issue in detail.) But now for a serious matter. Given what you have written earlier (my impression of you as contributor), wouldn't I be the least surprised if your knowledge (and interest also, perhaps ?) of the Spanish Civil War is of a very high standard. In my opinion does our article suffer of/from severe problems. Or at the very least might do so. (also including "surrounding articles"). I discovered this, as the article (until I made a correction) stated "The war began after a pronunciamiento (declaration of opposition) by a group of generals of the Spanish Republican Armed Forces, originally under the leadership of José Sanjurjo, against the elected, leftist government of the Second Spanish Republic, at the time under the leadership of President Manuel Azaña.". Although the main occurrence is true, did this event happen in 1934, and is more or less insignificant in the context of the actual outbreak, in July 1936. So do Anthony Beevor also say, more or less, in my only reliable source (which sadly just is available in Swedish) [4] - especially interesting parts of this article begins at line 5 "Det verkar.." (try Google Translator Swedish->English, it actually appears to work better now than earlier. Although ambiguos words still can result in a very strange word in the context. But apart from such errors, do I think it will be understandable enough) And about the "José Sanjurno coup" , third part "Om man bortser..". (I'm certain You are aware of these matters already, but I still want to show you "my source" so to speak). Further - History (or parts of it) is sometimes reevaluated. Like who killed all those Polish officers found in today's Belarus, today we know that Stalin was to blame for these killings. And while discussing that person, did his successor as General Secretary of the USSR Communist Party, Nikita Chrustjov, reveal a whole lot more about Stalin's tyranny. And parts of the history was rewritten. But if just one author comes up with an idea, and isn't followed by others, nor included in encyclopedias published 20 years later etc, in such cases do I believe that we (at the most) can present a such discovery as a theory. The wide majority and recognized quality of authors surely must be our primary way of describing the history. (?) In this article is it stated that the outbreak (or coup) was planned four months prior to July 19th. I'm open to new revealings but I have never before heard any other reason for the military coup initially led by Emilio Mola, but the one about first a nationalist assassination of a republican police officer. Followed by the Madrid police murder of José Calvo Sotelo (as Gil-Robles and some others couldn't be found). And when the government refused to take some kind of action, then Mola and other generals began the coup which soon led to the war. NB! This is just what I have thought for some 25 years, and I haven't read that much about this war. But I strongly fear that far too much of what our article tells as of now, is based on very shaky grounds. I base this on 1. What Beevor states (from line 5) 2. Checked Swedish encyclopedias published in the early 1940's , 1950's, 1960's and the CD-version of the last (?) major printed Swedish encyclopedia (from 2000) - and none of them mention any "four month planned coup". 3. Our lead impairs heavily with the Spanish one. To this can I add, that I can well imagine that many generals had ideas of overthrowing the Second Spanish Republic. But I strongly doubt that there was a specific plan that led to this coup. But if there are a sufficient amount of recognized authors that have accepted this idea, is it of course different. However does Beevor not appear to be included in a such group of authors. He also states there's a large disagreement about the reasons for this war (line 5..) If you have the interest and time, do I think that you most certainly are a contributor of the demanded caliber for this important task. And that was not a joke ! Boeing720 (talk) 17:25, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the external link, but have a look at [5] - a full translation, and the main reason for my fears. And that part should then be deleted. Boeing720 (talk) 00:07, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Boeing720:Sorry I don't have time to help work on pages relating to the Spanish Civil War. But, are you saying you added some copyright material to your sandbox? If so it should be removed and I will revision-delete it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:09, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. I just wanted to see IF this possibly could be something for you. I can however see how busy you are. I'll remove the translated text at once ! Thanks ! Boeing720 (talk) 22:42, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The text is now deleted. Boeing720 (talk) 22:55, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Revision deletion done. Sorry I can't make time to help. I am trying to limit my editing time so as to ensure I don't suffer ill effects from extended periods of sitting / working online. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:35, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CSD-copyvio / Muntra Tank

Hi,

When spotting a copyvio, IMO a good idea is to double-check the article history for versions which are OK. Staszek Lem (talk)

I normally do that, but must have missed doing so for this instance. Sorry for the mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:06, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa. I was a little suspicious of the format of the text added by an anon IP here. I wonder did you want to take a closer look? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:59, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I was unable to find any of this prose online. However the whole addition could be removed as unsourced, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:34, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks for checking. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:18, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

This G12 was declined by Patar knight, but the licence used (copied form Everipedia) is CC-BY-SA 4.0, which is not compatible with Wikipedia according to Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright. The site just says Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike, but the link given is for version 4.0 (so I'm assuming it's 4.0, as apparently has Patar knight). I've deleted the probable copyvio. Should the history be revdeled? Or have I got this all wrong? Thanks. Adam9007 (talk) 00:24, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It took some digging but here is their license page: https://everipedia.org/wiki/everipedia-terms/ which displays a link to https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/. This is not a compatible license (because of the share-alike part). I will do some revision deletion in a minute here. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:39, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Are you sure the lead isn't a copyvio too? Adam9007 (talk) 00:49, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Its okay, as it contains no creative content and is impossible to re-word. Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:53, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, I found that Everipedia page as well, but the Creative Commons summary page for CC BY-SA 4.0 is unhelpfully identical (except for the name) to the one for CC BY-SA 3.0, and I didn't think that anything at the more info link made the two incompatible, which I now realize is not what the table at WP:COMPLIC says. Do you have a link to the Wikimedia Legal team's reasoning for the incompatibility as mentioned in footnote 2 on that page? Thanks, ---- Patar knight - chat/contributions 03:58, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker) @Patar knight: I don’t know where that is, but it may be obsolescent; see m:Terms of use/Creative Commons 4.0/Legal note. Unless it’s an issue specific to ENWP … Maybe you can find more background in the discussion on the parent page’s Talk, which links to a poll with some 60% support for adopting CC 4.0. I have no idea whether or not that proposal is still a going concern; perhaps there’s something incompatible in the current TOU that will make a ‘package’ of changes necessary to implement it.—Odysseus1479 04:51, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)x2 See Wikipedia_talk:FAQ/Copyright#CC-BY_4.0_compatibility.3F. Basically the short of it is that a licensing upgrade would solve the problem but lacking a licensing upgrade CC-BY-SA 3.0 is stricter than CC-BY-SA 4.0 so 4.0 licensed text is not compatible with current WMF projects that operate under 3.0 TonyBallioni (talk) 05:14, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa,

Thanks for pointing it out. I revised the text to resolve the issue and would welcome your input. Also, I noticed the same problem in some of the other entries on the Duterte wiki, but I'm not sure if I should go in and correct them.

Thanks again Randall tor (talk) 03:23, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I have been instructed to edit Mel's Wiki page because it currently has nothing about him. I am unsure as to why my changes have been declined. I have received this bio of Melvyn from a factual source and did not take anything out of the previous Wiki page. Please revert this to the changes I made on August 23rd. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ballroombika (talkcontribs)

Thank you for your interest in working on wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.
The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest and copyright on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:29, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Melvyn Weiss copyvio

Hi Diannaa, can you rev-del the revisions in between these two; it's a copyvio again. Home Lander (talk) 14:42, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Thanks for the alert. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:44, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Hope you don't mind I modified the section title below this one; a template was somehow included in the title and broke it up. I hadn't yet seen a section title that was missing its edit button, but that one was. Home Lander (talk) 14:49, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All fixed now. Thank you — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:57, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

connected contributor Melvyn Weiss

Hello Dianaaa,

I am technically a connected contributor-- Yet, I have never met Melvyn, nor am I being paid. I am just editing his wikipedia to add his education and career from the goodness of my heart. In the case of copyright---how can something that's factual not be approved? It simply discusses his education and career from an unbiased stance.

Quote from RadioLab

Greetings Dianaa,

I cannot see what I had contributed on that page now, but in my edit summary I noted that I had used a quote.

Was the quote too long? Did I forget the quotation marks?

I would appreciate in your initial edit summary having more details as to why my contribution was removed, so I can relate that to WP policy and help me learn how to avoid doing this in the future. I also agree with these values as well.

Thank you, A ri gi bod (talk) 16:21, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

While your edit summary stated that the material was a quotation, there were no quotation marks. Also, we don't include content such as "Good news people!" even as part of a quotation. I think the main thrust of your edit was that an older tree had since been found, so perhaps you could just say that in your own words and avoid the use of a quotation altogether. Don't forget to cite your source. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:46, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the response. I forgot to included quotation marks and should have- thanks for catching that mistake. Since the my original edit is no longer visible, can you still see it? If yes, then did I also forget the citation as well?--A ri gi bod (talk) 16:35, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I can still view your addition. The citation was provided. It was from http://www.radiolab.org/story/91722-be-careful-what-you-plan-for/, and the content you added was identical to the paragraph that starts "Good news people!" and ends "Phew!". — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:58, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Cuenca Public Transportation Statistics

Hi, Diannaa. Re your removal of transportation statistics from the Cuenca article: as I remember it (dimly, maybe incorrectly), somebody sourced some statistics from the Moovit website, and I tweaked them. I don't see how that was violation of copyright as opposed to properly sourced data. Can you explain? Awien (talk) 21:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The original wording was identical to that found on the cited website. Your edits did not remove the copyright violation. If you wish to re-add the stats that would be fine but the prose descriptions would have to be re-written in your own words. the specific source for Cuenca was https://moovitapp.com/insights/en/Moovit_Insights_Public_Transit_Index_Ecuador_Cuenca-3813. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:07, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I hadn't noticed that the wording was copied. I'll try to add back the information in an acceptable form when (if) I have time. Awien (talk) 21:50, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You might be interested to know that the edit was one of over a hundred such entries citing the same source as a form of ref-spam. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:29, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, a user added copyrighted material to both the articles, I have cleaned it though. May you want to delete it from the history? Thanks Hitro talk 20:10, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done, also checked his uploads at the Commons — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:36, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:vijayantgovinda

Hi Diannaa. Regarding the copyright violation for No Scalpel Vasectomy, i changed the concerned line in my own words. And cited the source too. I appreciate the help. I would like to improve the article to a good article. If you could guide me to the right template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vijayantgovinda (talkcontribs) 08:20, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Al Smith

I don't think any great harm is done by having a distinct article Al Smith presidential campaign, 1928, but as I reminded Jon, there is no point in having two articles with a similar level of detail. He'd have to redact Al Smith. Thanks for picking up the cut-n-paste. Rhadow (talk) 21:17, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of Public Transportation Statistics Data - user: JayMeydad

(your message: "Copyright problem on Miami and elsewhere")

Hi Diannaa Regarding the claimed copyright violation on data about public transportation - all the data I added rephrased before added to wikipedia. Moreover, with every edit I made I added a link to the source, which is open for any user online and does not contains any copyrighted information. The statistical data is very relevant to the articles I added it and enrich the content with information that people who looks for this type of data may find highly valuable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JayMeydad (talkcontribs) 12:26, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Diannaa: Please check Moovit site again: https://moovitapp.com/insights ; The data is now available under CC license (as described now at the footer). Can you please undo removal?. — JayMeydad

Edition visibility in Zaragoza

Hi Diannaa. You changed the visibility of three revisions in the article for Zaragoza, but I think you made a mistake. One is correct (and you reverted the edition), but the other two just added citations that remain in the article. I see nothing wrong with these citations, by the way. I don't know if that visibility change can be reverted but, if possible, I think you should revert it for those two changes.--Gorpik (talk) 10:38, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I did it that way is because in order to completely remove the copyright violation, all intervening diffs need to be revision deleted, from the insertion of the copyvio to its removal. This means that sometimes harmless diffs have to be hidden. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:48, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying licensed material requires proper attribution (re: Austronesian alignment)

Hello. You left a message on my talk-page. I responded there to indicate that I do not know what material you are talking about that was copied from Blust's ebook, The Austronesian Languages. Please specify what that material is. Raphinou (talk) 13:18, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:53, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Looked over the iThenticate report. Left a reply to it on my talk-page. I do ask that you remove the revision you included in the references section of the Wikipedia article on Austronesian alignment. Thanks. Raphinou (talk) 00:15, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Replied there. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:46, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Replied to your comment there. Thanks also for removing the revision.Raphinou (talk) 15:50, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Potentially libelous material

Does this seem like something that should be revdeled? Thanks for your opinion. 32.218.152.249 (talk) 14:40, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Before an edit war starts, one should point out that the article is about the company, not the principals. Therefore, if the allegations are to be recorded, they belong in a biography. Rhadow (talk) 15:51, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"if the allegations are to be recorded"?? There are no sources (The cited sources are bogus links.), so why would the allegations be "recorded"? 32.218.152.249 (talk) 16:04, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
(talk page stalker)As a note for D, I've emailed oversight asking them to assess the situation as a whole dating back to the 2015 BLP vios. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:16, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks TonyBallioni and Ian.thomson. 32.218.152.249 (talk) 16:26, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Diannaa,
When you have time to check it, this article seems to have some copyright violations. Woodlot (talk) 19:08, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I found that the Wordpress page is dated after the material was posted here so that's a Wikipedia mirror. If the prose was copied from some other source it's not something I am able to find online. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:24, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake, did not consider "mirror". Thanks. Woodlot (talk) 21:03, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure this was a copyvio?

Are you sure this was a copyvio? You can't copyright the statistics, and it was not verbatim from the source. - Jmabel | Talk 04:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The specific source for Bursa was here. The reason I removed it is because the descriptive prose was copied unaltered from the source web page. While copying numerical data is okay, copying verbatim the accompanying prose is a copyright violation. This entry was one of over a hundred such edits by this user citing the same website, as a form of ref-spam. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:51, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Transport in HK

Hi Diannaa, I see you deleted my edits. Can you restore it? And why did you delete my edit and other edits? My edits were not copied.

Thanks.101.178.163.208 (talk) 05:40, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I did not delete your edits; I removed a copyright violation that had been added on June 26. Your edit was hidden in the page history as part of the revision deletion process, but the material you added was not removed. Please check this diff which shows additions to the page from 07:46, June 26, 2017‎ to present, and you will see what I mean. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:15, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio on CZ 75

Hello. This edit added text copied verbatim from http://cz-usa.com/product/cz-75-sp-01-tactical-9mm-black-3-dot-tritium-sights-18-rd-mags/ , so would you mind hiding it? Cheers, - Tom | Thomas.W talk 16:42, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:40, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Could you look over the edits of Sein und Zeit with an eye to determining if this is another of English Patriot Man's many socks? They began editing just after Robinson98354, the last of EPN's known socks, was blocked. I think I have enough evidence to file an SPI, but it would be quicker if you were to take a look, as you are familiar with this sockmaster's editing, I believe. Certainly, the subject area overlap between the three is a perfect match, since it's all about Nazi racial policy. Thanks. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:41, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]