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 Moscowamerican (talk | contribs) at 09:12, 1 November 2017 (→‎Felix Z. Longoria Jr. copyvio? and User:C. W. Gilmore). 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 6:31 pm, 16 September 2024 UTC [refresh].
Talk page archive
Send me no flowers
List

AHC300

He's composed (what I consider to be) a fairly good unblock appeal; I can't reasonably say that he doesn't understand copyright on Wikipedia based on that. Any objections to an unblock? Yunshui 雲水 13:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will do it and will add to my list of people to monitor. Thanks for letting me know, kinda busy here suddenly :) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:17, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you know what they say: if you want something done... Cheers Diannaa, will leave it to you. Yunshui 雲水 13:19, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dianna. You removed part of my edit on Airlink ("Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed.") and invited me to comment... I thought the edit was OK (obviously), but unless I'm being very slow here, my original full edit has now been deleted, so I can't find out which particular point has been removed, let alone agree or disagree about it! It also makes it quite difficult to learn in what way you felt the rules had been broken. Thanks. Carbonix (talk) 17:40, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carbonix. Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright violation and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. I paraphrased the content and removed the copyright bits. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:02, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

To revdel or not to revdel, that is the question

Bad time to ask this as I know you are extremely busy, but your name came up in IRC in a mildly a more amusing way.

The good news is that it came up in the context of contributors falling all over each other to praise you, but based on one comment, I asked about the policy of doing revdels when one reverts due to a copyright issue. One respondent said that you do all your own revdells and another said that, no, in fact most of the revdells they did were in response to your requests.

My guess is both are partially correct. My guess is that sometimes when you do a reversion you do the revdel yourself but in other cases you leave a request to someone else to look at (four eyes concept?). If my guess is correct, can you share thoughts on your own rules for handling revdels? We discussed the four eyes principle before, and as a result, if I see what looks like a G12 I tag it but leave it for someone else to delete. However, when I do a partial reversion, I typically will revdel the relevant edits, so I'm curious to learn when you do that and when you leave it for others.--S Philbrick(Talk) 18:43, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sphilbrick! How nice to hear that people have been saying good things about me. Not so busy any more, as there's only 16 cases remaining from October 19 reports. I better take a break soon though and get outside for my bike ride in the heat of the day (it's 8° C as we speak!). I do my own revision-deletions; I've never filed any such requests. But for G12 speedy deletions I almost invariably tag them using Twinkle and leave them for another admin to double check. Sometimes I put a note on the talk page if the case looks like a tricky one. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:51, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK thanks. Glad to hear you are catching up, because I've got a thorny issue that's embarrassingly old. I doubt I'll get to it today but I may drop you a note in the next few days asking for some help.--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:42, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, happy to help. Feel free to send via email or post here, whatevs. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Presidential Commission of Inquiry on Bond Issuance, Sri Lanka

Hi Diannaa, the article as titled above was created based on functions of a Presidential Commission appointed by the President of Sri Lanka. I had to cite many news reports published by Sri Lankan mass media. There were of course similarities in the article with regard to those reports. But it was not the same copy paste of the reports except the contents quoted from the statements made by the Counsels, Judges and the Witnesses. I would like to request you to re-examine the article and restore if possible. Thanks. Dinuraeditions (talk) 02:23, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I won't be able to restore the article, as its content was copied pretty much exclusively from copyright news websites. For example enormous copyright violations were found from these websites:
These are examples only. The remainder of the content appeared to be copyvio as well, so I deleted the article. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:46, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's alright. I wish if you'd never be offered a bribe by a politician :) Dinuraeditions (talk) 03:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC) Could I have a copy of the deleted article then, please? Dinuraeditions (talk) 03:50, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sent via email. The version I sent is what it looked like before I started removing copyvio — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 09:40, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if you might have any thoughts on my suggestion at Wikipedia talk:Copyrights#Suggested amendment? The policy seems obvious to me, but our latest friend clearly needed to have it spelled out explicitly. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:21, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I like it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:22, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Review Page

Hello Diannaa,

I resubmitted a page titled "Ursula Hayden" about a month ago and i was wondering if you might know when someone will review it? Thank you so much and have a beautiful day! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kindness33 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kindness33. There are currently 1600 pending submissions in the queue so it will likely be a while. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:16, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Stefan Thomke

I have re-written the short note on HBS Professor Stefan Thomke and have provided references (pretty much for every line). Please note that the earlier post is wrong as Thomke is not an economist. I was surprised that Wikipedia would deleted my changes due to copyright issues but did not feel it is important to correct entirely inaccurate information. I have kept it short this time. Please feel free to make any further wording changes as necessary. Appreciate your help. Important thing is to not let the wrong information again come back on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Budhagupta (talk • contribs) 00:29, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

hi

[1] from [2] wondering if proper attribution was given, thanks--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 10:33, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ozzie10aaaa. It's pretty good. The only thing I would add is to wikilink Marburg virus disease. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:59, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 13:02, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa, I've reverted some content cut and pasted from [3], and it may need to be rev/deleted. Thank you very much, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 12:09, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Also I placed a warning on the user's talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:01, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Diannaa. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 16:24, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Regd. your message to attribute re-used Wikipedia text

Hi Diannaa, You left a message on a page that I created ("The Fourteenth Finance Commission of India") asking me to attribute another wikipedia page ("The Thirteenth Finance Commission of India"). At a first glance both the text do look similar but if you read through them you'll notice that they are completely different. I wanted to cite the commission's original report, but it isn't available online anymore so I cited some other web site instead.

Thank you.

Hardik.popli (talk) 20:27, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hardik.popli. The "recommendations" section is identical in both articles. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 10:38, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They're similar, not identical -- the changes are extremely important. In fact, point 1 of the recommendations links refers to the 13th commission's report. Let me know if you have any questions. Hardik.popli (talk) 17:37, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updates for Sageworks

Hi, Diannaa. Hope you don't mind my reaching out, I thought to do so as you're the most recent registered user to edit Sageworks and I wondered if you might have a few minutes to review an edit request for the page? My request is a proposed update for the History section. As disclosure, I'm making this request for Sageworks as part of my work with Beutler Ink; at Talk:Sageworks I've provided some background on the history of the page and why I'm offering new drafts. Let me know if you have any feedback or questions. Thanks in advance! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 03:09, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I don't have time to help with that. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 10:36, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Diannaa, I completely understand. Thanks for replying. If you have any ideas on other editors or WikiProjects where folks might be interested in this, please do let me know. I've reached out to the usual WikiProjects so far. Thanks! 16912 Rhiannon (Talk · COI) 20:47, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible Copyvio Trial of Satanta and Big Tree

Hello Diannaa, according to Copyvio Detector, there appear to be several blocks of cut-and-paste text added to the article from other sources. Could you take a look? Thanks. Woodlot (talk) 12:49, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The material it's highlighting appears to be only the block quotes. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:05, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Working-Class Studies Association page

Hi Diannaa, Thanks for your edits and pointing out the copyright infringement. As secretary and steering committee member of the WCSA, I didn't feel that I was infringing copyright by using language from our website, since I'm writing the article on behalf of the WCSA steering committee (by which I mean to say, I had permission, but not evidence of permission). I appreciate your clarification of the policy--which is a good one, obviously-- and am happy to learn of the option to donate copyrighted material. However in this case I just chose to rewrite and make the points in my own words, which is a better solution all around. So, thank you for your attention and work keeping Wikipedia free of copyright infringement! Macloyne (talk) 14:23, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Macloyne. 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) 14:27, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Diannaa for drawing this to my attention, and for the helpful links. I am very sorry for engaging in this discouraged practice. The article is intended to be educational, not promotional, and I hope you and other editors will agree it fits Wikipedia's mission. I have disclosed the COI on my user page, and from here on out I will refrain from making major edits directly and otherwise adhere to WP:COI policies and recommended practices. - Macloyne (talk)

User:Rodrigocoelhoc

You left a message about copyright at User talk:Rodrigocoelhoc. Appears to be a purely planetyze.com promotional account? 2001:E68:542E:805D:96D:E06A:F27F:4424 (talk) 20:15, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That might be true. I have placed a COI notice on their talk page and suggest if you think immediate action is needed you post at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:45, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copying licensed material requires proper attribution

Hi Dianaa thanks for help with the proper referencing on the Redback page, as I was intending that material (partial sentence) to be quoted, would it have been acceptable to simply enclose it in double quotation marks as an alternative to changing he referencing type?Robertwhyteus (talk) 21:03, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Redback spider. Not sure what you mean by "changing the referencing type"; what I did was add the proper title of the source webpage, attribution for compatibly licensed material, and a functional url. These changes go beyond a change in style, as they provide a much more useful citation. Changing the copied material to a quotation would be okay, but I think the way I did it is a lot more appropriate. I also removed a copy-paste error (some content was in there twice) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:40, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks good to know. I appreciate your help!Robertwhyteus (talk) 21:50, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

You final-warned this user earlier this month, but they're at it again. See Alternative medicine for example.LeadSongDog come howl! 15:39, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User was warned three minutes ago (four hours after their most recent edit) by a different admin, so I am not going to block at this point. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:46, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I will add a more specific warning to his talk page and monitor his contribs. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:52, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Diannaa. You should be on payroll too. Drmies (talk) 18:30, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Looking closer at their contribs, the bulk do seem to be legit, it's just a few, but of course that's still too many. LeadSongDog come howl! 19:53, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Another Copyvio issue:

I have just had cause to leave a firm but gentle warning on this user's talk page. It seemed sensible to check all their recent page creations, and I found quite a few similar issues which I've listed. Only afterwards did I go back through their repeatedly blanked talk page and spotted you'd had need to leave a final warning for the same offenses on 16th April. I thought I'd bring this to your attention, though I don't think any fuirther action is warranted right now. I'll happily monitor their future contributions and report any further violations if they occur. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:49, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Nick Moyes: Thanks for your message. The articles you listed on his talk page need to be cleaned of the copyvio. If the editor does not do that in the next few days I will do it and then I will do the revision deletion. I have left a sterner warning and will monitor. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:46, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Content removal on Keralam - Museum of History and Heritage

Hi Diannaa, thank you for reviewing the content on the new page I created. Yes, it is true that I have referred to the cited website source for the list of attractions, but I assure you it was not blind copying - I have tried to paraphrase it and link to existing wiki articles as much as possible. However, a list of attractions is a list of attractions (with only few words per points). So, I cannot imagine now if I can shorten or paraphrase it so much. Another concern I have is: I doubt if it is fair to "delete" content without even giving a 24 hours notice on a global voluntary platform. Ideally, I would prefer 48-72 hours notice (this would be fairer, especially to people from developing countries who don't have the luxury of having access to full-time electricity and/or internet even if they had the time). I had spent at least half an hour to carefully review content and prepare this page. Most of my hard work is in vain now - while I welcome your careful review, would I be wrong if I may deem such cut-throat deletion a disrespect to my voluntary effort along with a full-time job in a different time zone? Please let me know if I can at least have read-only access to the previous version contents, so that I can compare with the original and see what can be removed, edited or rephrased to conform the article to the Wikipedia standards. - Sahrudayan (talk) 17:53, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright violation and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap.
Copyright violations are a serious problem with legal considerations, and must be dealt with promptly. It's not an occasional problem: there's anywhere from 75 to 100 potential violations to be assessed each day. Since there's only a very small group of people working on copyright cleanup, discussion of each individual violation is not practical, as by the end of the week there would be literally hundreds of open items requiring follow-up and there would be no time to assess the new daily incoming reports.
Content has to be written in your own words and not inclusive of the source material at all. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. (For example, "Burial accompaniments belonging to the Iron Age" could be paraphrased as "Iron Age grave goods".) There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Purdue or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:00, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks User:Diannaa for the information and guidelines. However, why do you delete the whole thing without giving me a warning or time to edit? I had painfully searched for existing Wikipedia articles etc. to link, why do you force me to repeat all this effort? Do you think this is the way you reward someone who puts voluntary efforts? I had a look at the ithenticate report now, but it does not show details of which part of the text was overlapping with existing sources - because the corresponding wiki article versions are already deleted. Is there a way I can see the original article version that you deleted, that can help me prevent reinventing the wheel? Sahrudayan (talk) 02:44, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The iThenticate link works fine for me, as it highlights the overlapping text in red. Not sure why it does not work properly for you. I am sending you a copy of the removed text via email, alongside the material from the website. It's all identical. Please don't add copyright material to this wiki. It's a violation of copyright law and the copyright policy of this wiki. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:41, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the email that provides the version differences. The iThenticate link works for you probably because you still have access to the deleted versions whereas I don't. Please do think from normal user perspective before you take actions like this. I totally understand the copyright violation issue, but please give sufficient warning/notice (at least 24 hours) before blanket deletion of content. I thank you and appreciate your wiki gardening efforts once again! Sahrudayan (talk) 13:00, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
There must be a glitch of some kind; I have tried the iThenticate link with my non-admin account, and it works perfectly. Sorry about that. — Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 13:05, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to say, it won't be possible to give people warnings as there's right now 85 reports on the board waiting to be assessed. This represents six to eight hours work. If I give each person 24 hours to repair their edit that would require at least double the time. It's physically impossible for me to spend that much time online, as I would have to risk my own health and well-being to do so. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:12, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Thank you for your message.

I just have a passion for Japan and videogames and I have my favorite sources from those places. I will be sure to improve my edits adding multiple sources, thank you! Rodrigocoelhoc (talk) 23:40, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of The Journal of Sustainable Development of Energy, Water and Environment Systems – JSDEWES

Hello Diannaa, I would love if we can discuss what did I done wrong so my wiki article went on speedy deletion. What do i need to fix so an article about JSDEWES stays on Wikipedia?

Best regards, Klabura (talk) 09:56, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Klabura. The article was deleted because all of its contents were copied from this document. Wikipedia cannot accept copyright content unless the copyright holder has given permission and formally in writing released the material under a compatible license. What to do? You can either write a new article on your own words, or if the copyright holder wishes to release this material to Wikipedia under license, follow the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:26, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]


SMH

SMHHHHHHHH DIANNAA YeahImaBoss (talk) 16:29, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Problematic editor

Hello Diannaa,

I belive that the editor Johnscribner is only looking for a playground. The data he/she added to the infoboxes were never present on the source webpage and seemed completely arbitrary. Is there anything you can do against it? Thank you in advance. Wildkatzen (talk) 00:59, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your first stop should always be to talk to the user and I have gone ahead and done that. If the problem persists please let me know. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:08, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyvio

Hello, Diannaa. Could you check this content please for possible copyvio? It appears to be cut&pasted or lifted from another source. Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 04:40, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zefr. I could not find any of the added material in online sources. Thanks for your concern, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:09, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

IP24.190.40.112

It seems to be the long-term vandalism, 24.190.40.112's copyright content copied edits are not only exists in List of supercentenarians from the United States, but also in Talk:List of supercentenarians from the United States. see page history.Inception2010 (talk) 16:26, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The IP is already blocked for a month. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:29, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I already Know that the IP is already blocked for a month. this edit are copyright content copied edits and must deleted, see revision history of Talk:List of supercentenarians from the United States.Inception2010 (talk) 16:45, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh okay I see that now. Rev-del now complete. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:51, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! Inception2010 (talk) 17:00, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for not reading your message thoroughly the first time! My bad :) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:04, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

Jeromeenriquez is back to creating copyvio articles again with Alobo Naga. I've removed the violating content and revdel'd. I know you said the last time that the next step would be a block, but have never done a copyvio block before, so I'm deferring to you on how to handle this. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. I had him in the virtual tickler file to check for copyvio and would have seen this next time I resumed editing. I checked his remaining edits from today and found nothing else untoward. I use an indef block, and add a blurb below as to how to get unblocked. This blurb and other useful talk page blurbs can be found at User:Diannaa/Copyright so that I don't have to re-invent the wheel all teh time. I have other frequently-used stuff on a notepad document. Now I will watch-list the user's talk page and see; hopefully we can unblock at some point. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:20, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, thats what I thought, but also wanted someone else to check since I've somewhat taken him under my wing. I do hope we can unblock, but given how prolific his creations are and how prone they are to copyvio, I agree 100% with your call. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:50, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Diannaa a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Slightlymad 03:50, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Johnscribner

Hi Diannaa,

I see that you spoke with Johnscribner (talk · contribs) yesterday in regards to his problematic edits, it seems that he has not taken your advice. I have just reviewed several of his edits, all include made up statistics. Thought I would make you aware of the ongoing problem.

Regards, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:26, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I have issued a sterner warning and will monitor his contribs. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:50, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

FYI

English Patriot Man sock Sein und Zeit made 20 edits to Elvis Presley, [4] adding about 3,800 bytes. Rassenschande‎ is an article edited by quite a few EPM socks, so when a brand new editor with the account name "Elvis the King" makes its first edit to Rassenschande‎, it gets my attention. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:27, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's one of the articles I watch-list specifically for this reason. Note the choice of subject matter for the edit: racial defilement. I will send you the list of articles via email. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:27, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to say, thank you very much for your help! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 04:12, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:20, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Flagcruft" on Manstein page

Could I please understand your thinking over removing the flags from the Manstein page when it comes to his Orders and decorations? Such use of flags is consistent with many other biographical pages on Wikipedia when it comes to the listing of honours, indeed it allows those of a vexillogical bent to immediately regcognise where an honour is from, indeed the vexillology and phaleristics are two studies that often go hand in hand.

I am therefore unsure as to the intellectual consistency of removing them some pages, but leaving them on others, especially when it seems to be the norm. Why do you classify them as 'cruft', when so many other pages do not?

Also my apologies if I have done this "talk" action incorrectly, as I am new to the talk option, or rather new to the need of it, so hope I havent fouled it up too much. :-/

I already opened a discussion on the article talk page where I noted several examples of articles that don't have such flags, and provide a link to the section of the Manual of Style that discusses why we don't include them. The shortcut to that section is WP:Flagcruft, which is why I used that word. Please post there if you wish to discuss it further, so other interested editors can post comments if they want to. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:42, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revdel request

This may be just some made-up story, but if it's not, it's a serious unsourced allegation. Could you please take a look? Thanks. 32.218.35.237 (talk) 21:27, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Revision deleted and oversight contacted. Thank you, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:44, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Felix Z. Longoria Jr. copyvio? and User:C. W. Gilmore

Sorry to bother you but you did extensive copyvio revdels on Felix Z. Longoria Jr. previously. User:C. W. Gilmore seems to be the source over many years and just recently awoke into a few kerfuffles from being rather dormant. This edit claims to be curative and adds a source but is obviously not curative when the source was word-for-word identical. It missed your previous cleanup as it would have been hard to spot without the source. Unfortunately, I've been unable to track its origination as the rev dels spanned years. This diff[5] is all I can see so I can't see who inserted the cut/paste from Together we served or who added the "citation needed" tag in 2016. User:C. W. Gilmore replaced a trivial amount of words and seemed to know they came from TWS. Not sure whether this is an isolated minor vio or long term editor issue since I can't see the revdels. --DHeyward (talk) 06:01, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]


I recall that the section was marked as citation needed, so I found a source and recall changing 15 days to 2weeks. I did not post original section, I just found a source and changed a couple of words. What is wrong? I don't quite understand.
Does that section need to be re-written, if so, I could try to do it, but I didn't write the original. Please clarify, thanksC. W. Gilmore (talk) 06:23, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've worked on this page off and on for years as my mother was the last owner of the funeral home before it was tourn down and my grandfather was Felix's best friend, he's even mentioned in the book. I come back to this every few years to check on it and fix what I can. Sorry but I'm not the best editor or that great with computers.C. W. Gilmore (talk) 06:52, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
It does not appear to be the case of just finding a source. You found "THE source" from which it was lifted verbatim. You then changed it in a trivial way which is still afoul of copyvio. You noted that your edit was to fix the copyright and add a source. I cannot tell if you added any copyrighted material so Diannaa will have to address that. Also, I don't know if it needs more revdels. I cannot say you did anything wrong without being able to see the history which is why I brought it here. Diannaa has been the admin cleaning up the copyvio's and is the person that can assess who/what/when/how. Finding a source that showed the copyright infringement is a good thing but the copyvio needs to be properly fixed and I am not able to determine if it needs to be suppressed. (N.B. I formatted your comment to remove leading space/box.) --DHeyward (talk) 07:05, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the help and I had no idea about the copyright thing as I said I only found a source and changed it to 2 weeks because that's what my book said. Please tell me if you find anything else, I can try to re-write any section as I the book to reference and I can look up other sources. I figured that if the section was on here, then someone had checked it. Again, please let me know if other section have problems. ThanksC. W. Gilmore (talk) 07:25, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please reverse the deletion of the material I added to wikipedia and remove the warnings on my talk page

Hello, in an extremely aggressive manner, you threatened to block me from wikipedia, based on your personal interpenetration of Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Quotations and WP:NFCCEG.


Please reverse the deletion of the material I added to Wikipedia and remove the warnings on my talk page.

I would like to work with you civilly to build an encyclopedia.

Thank you in advance. Moscowamerican (talk) 09:12, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Diannaa&oldid=808171574"