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 117.20.41.10 (talk) at 01:59, 30 November 2017 (→‎Copyvio from Rhine Revival: typo). 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 6:25 pm, 17 August 2024 UTC [refresh].

Hello, Diannaa. If possible, I'd like to ask you for advice regarding a copyright issue. Does it constitute a copyright violation to list all the chapters of a book in the way that they appear on a contents page of that book, for example? I've long assumed that it does, but I'd like confirmation on whether that is correct or not, or specifically in what situations it applies. Thank you. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 22:04, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My opinion is that if it's clearly stated as a list of chapters, that makes it obvious that it's a quotation, and short quotations are okay, not a copyvio. I don't think it's something we normally do, but I can't find anything on this topic in the manual of style. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:11, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa,
It would appear to me that, between the two of us, we've fixed the copyvio problems at Southern Center for Human Rights.
Could you possibly have a look at Draft:The Sun and Her Flowers? The draft has been rejected as too flowery :-), but it also appears to contain copyright violations: here's a snapshot from Google Books.
I would value your thoughts about this - Pete AU aka --Shirt58 (talk) 09:51, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work rescuing Southern Center for Human Rights. I had a feeling it would be possible to do but I was baffled as to how. Regarding Draft:The Sun and Her Flowers, I am unable to view the Google snapshot from my location, so I can't help with that one. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:43, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyvio issues

Hi Diannaa. A new user (Tiwahi) replaces useful maps with his own works. The images have copyvio issues and do not seem user-generated. What should be done? Thank you. 98.214.89.172 (talk) 16:21, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've just looked through a couple dozen of their edits and am not seeing any maps changed/altered. Could you please give some examples? Primefac (talk) 17:45, 19 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]
I've checked the user's uploads at the Commons, where they've uploaded several maps. I'm not seeing any obvious copyright issues with any of them. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:51, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sumharam inaccurate location

Sumharam is a coastal town, but the map previously used on Hadramawt article shows it (inland)

Compare: The Old Map previously used in the Hadramawt article: Image:Map_of_Aksum_and_South_Arabia_ca._230_AD.jpg

The new map I drew for the Hadramawt article, with accurate details: File:Hadramawt_400_BC.jpg

An unregistered user, removed the map I drew from scratch (worked hours on) & I hope you can discuss this with him, since he/she decided to come to your page.

The actual location of Sumhuram is on the coast (17°2′20.4″N 54°26′4″E). Regards & hopefully you resolve this issue with the user who removed the maps I corrected.

The second issue the map is used specifically for Hadramaut & Hadramite, so it will naturally focus on the subject which might be an issue? Tiwahi (talk) 18:54, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is not the place to discuss the correctness of the maps. The place to do that is at the talk pages of the involved articles. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:52, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ADAM

This is ADAM[1] rather than the NIH and is thus not PD. Hope all is well :-) Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:09, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are the images from Google maps, street view available to upload? C. W. Gilmore (talk) 01:34, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No. Google copyrights all their images. Open source maps such as OpenStreetMap are available under a compatible license. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:09, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I thought there was an issue, but I figured I would ask. I have also emailed, asking the group that operates, Jefferson Davis Park, Washington for permission to use their images. I have yet to receive a reply, given the weather, it may be spring or even summer before I can get there and take descent photos myself so I figured I could ask. Thanks again C. W. Gilmore (talk) 15:30, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I got the photos taken and uploaded, not the best, but it was a rainy autumn day in the Pacific Northwest. I will have to wait for a clear and breezy day to take pictures of the flags. Thanks for the help. C. W. Gilmore (talk) 09:52, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AMDA Page

Hi there! I actually work for AMDA and we are trying to get the information and copy updated on our Wikipedia page. Is there a specific route I should take for this process? Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domiblue (talkcontribs) 02:44, 21 November 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) 12:10, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, so how would be go about updating the information you currently have listed, and using photos we own on the page? Particularly because our logo was recently changed, the number of students you list is inaccurate, and we would like to include images and information on both our campuses? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Domiblue (talkcontribs) 00:58, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What you need to do is propose changes on the article's talk page using the {{request edit}} template. Another editor has already provided a more detailed answer; see Talk:American Musical and Dramatic Academy. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:48, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copy-edit Q.

Hi there. Hope you don't mind a quick question. I notice that you're involved with GOCE, and I have a comma problem that's driving me nuts. I can't work out if the statement "In 1815, Napoleon was defeated at Waterloo" requires that comma. I've searched various WP pages on MOS and copy-editing, but can't find anywhere that either answers the question or points me to where I can ask the question. Do you know of any such places? I'd be particulalry interested to know of any forum where the finer points of written English can be discussed; my English is not quite FA quality, and I'm hoping to get one or two articles up to that standard soon. TIA. FactotEm (talk) 17:22, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have the Chicago Manual of Style (16th edition) and it says "An introductory adverbial phrase is often set off by a comma but it need not be unless misreading is likely." One example they give of correct usage is After 1956 such complaints about poor fidelity became far less common. Since American English tends to use far more commas than British style, inclusion might depend on the style. Perhaps you could post specific questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors or get yourself one of these here Chicago books. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:43, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Grand. Thanks for your help. Much appreciated. FactotEm (talk) 21:50, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa, when you have the chance, this may need some rev/deletion for copyright issues. Thank you, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 23:16, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Thanks for your interest in copyvio clean-up. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:53, 21 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
My pleasure. Cheers, 2601:188:180:11F0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 01:36, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Bucket (TV series)

Hi Diannaa, could you please check Bucket (TV series) for copyvio? Thanks and regards, JennyOz (talk) 03:19, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Plot summaries were all copyvio. Thanks for reporting, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:20, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for dealing with them, JennyOz (talk) 13:27, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your deletions from Jack Greenberg

This is dcw2003. Your deletions from Jack Greenberg were information I clearly cited from the Washington Post article and from other articles. My additions to the article from this source were modified significantly to prevent the possibility of copyright infringement. Did you believe they were copied directly from the article? They were not. What was the issue that caused you to remove them? Thanks, just checking, DCW2003 Of course the source is copyrighted. Nearly all source material from newspapers is. Please reply if you have time. Thank-you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcw2003 (talkcontribs)

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. You hardly modified the content at all, presenting the same material in the same order using almost identical wording. That's a copyright violation. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:43, 22 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Would you have a moment to look at recent edits to Hazard Powder Company. It was a cut-and-paste move from Hazardville, Connecticut, but large sections are still unsourced. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 14:26, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi M677. All the content was brought over as-is from Hazardville, Connecticut. I've added the required attribution and left a note on the talk page of the user who moved the material. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:48, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Round Table footnote in Ivison Macadam page

Thanks Dianaa, I had methodically double checked by e-mail my own records with the Hon Secretary of the Round Table magazine as to the sub-titles of the magazine over the years, which he confirmed back by e-mail as correct and sent the passage knowing it was for inclusion in the Wikipedia entry along with the link to the history of the Round Table but I see what you mean and I had not made that source clear. The titles are of course very much in the public domain but I will reword the footnote so it avoids beyond doubt any seemingly copyright problem. Many thanks for bringing this to my attention.William Macadam (talk) 10:36, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

CRI and copyrights

Hello Diannaa, Thanks for your watch on Center_for_Research_and_Interdisciplinarity. I'am both an wikipedian and a staff of this institute. We are aware of our students effort to revamp the page, I pointed them out earlier how to proceed and suggested them to ask me for support in case of conflict. I cannot see the exact section you deleted but they visibly copied content from our institute webpage without getting our webmaster to tag it as cc-by-sa prior to its integration on Wiki. Also, I will ask our webmaster to put the said page's content under cc-by-sa, so we can restore the content you hidden.

Also, as I never used this functionality of wikipedia (copyvio content masking/deletion?), I don't know if the content can be restored or what is or is not possible. Feel free to brief me on that.

I come back to you as soon as the said page is under cc-by-sa :D --Yug (talk) 12:44, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yug. Revision deletion was done to completely the copyright material from the page history. If and when the material is released under a compatible license, the revision deletion can be reversed and the content can be restored. Revision deletion and its removal require administrative tools. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:49, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Ok got it. The material can be restored. Thanks for explaining. Will need few hours for that. Yug (talk) 12:52, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done : open license added, https://cri-paris.org/the-cri/, bottom of the page. I think you can restore the content previously masked for copyvio.
I tried to saved it to the web archive but failed on this. Seems the button "save page" disappeared. Yug (talk) 14:58, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
So sorry, but Creative Commons Attibution-Sharelike 4.0 is not a compatible license. Please see Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Can I add something to Wikipedia that I got from somewhere else? for a list of compatible licenses. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:06, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh. Good to know. It's funny that it goes to 3 but not 4. I ping my coworker on this but may need to wait Monday~ Yug (talk) 17:51, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Lucky me! Webmaster still here, leaving. He changed the license to 3.0, please check the link.
Note: I made few edits on that article by reflex since, my apologize. Feel free to overwrite or discard them if too troublesome. Yug (talk) 17:58, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I have undone the revision deletion but I have not restored the content. If you wish to restore it you will have to do it yourself, as I don't want it to appear that I endorse its inclusion. It's pretty spammy / advertorial. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:25, 24 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Using images in the Signpost

You are my 'go-to' editor regarding copyrights. I would like to use this image:File:Pierino contro tutti.jpg so that I can both critique the image along with creating a parody of the image in the Signpost. Thumbs up or down? Best Regards, Barbara (WVS)   00:17, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not okay. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:50, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Project Servator Questions

As this is my first ever personally written page I would appreciate constructive advice on how to stay close to the Wikipedia rules. From my understanding of your comments it would appear that the sources are OK but the quantity of text from these sources is too close to the original in these publications for your liking/wikipedia house rules. If this is so, I'll look again, removing the words and rewriting them from a personal interpretation of the words standpoint instead, which is what I think you are seeking. You also mention some quotations that are unecssarily positive about the person or group that are saying them - I get that point now and will tackle that too. You cited one publication as an issue Professional Security magazine, its stories are in the public domain. It is a source freely viewable through links on the web. It does not operate any sort of firewall for its content - which would be an obvious no no. Why is this not a good source? Steve virgin (talk) 15:47, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Professional Security magazine has a copyright notice on the bottom of their webpage: © PROFESSIONAL SECURITY MAGAZINE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. However, under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. Exceptions include works of the US Government and material specifically released under license. Even then, proper attribution is required.
Regarding our copyright standards, content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording at all from the source material. 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. 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) 19:13, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Helpful. Interesting. Thanks Steve virgin (talk) 05:14, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

copyrighted information to be removed

Hi, thanks for checking stuff these trolls post though you have not removed the "source" of the copy-pasted data which is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Xiaomi_Redmi_Note_4&oldid=812001348 I also think that User:T.Rajasekhar_Reddy should receive warning for trolling and using copyrighted articles. Regards --Bololabich (talk) 21:34, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea why you describe the editor as a troll; it appears he is simply one of the many people who does not yet understand our copyright requirements. I have now performed revision-deletion on his edit and warned. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:38, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The reason of me calling him a troll is not him not knowing about copyrights but his other edits which were nothing more than changing informations to fake ones in RMN4 article :) --Bololabich (talk) 21:44, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Using the wiki to advertise?

Hi Dianna,

Not trying to cause a fuss or anything, but is this allowed? Please see User:Bj Simkhada for further info.

Kind regards, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:05, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else has blanked the page. Thanks for your note, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 09:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand your message about what is common source material, as you did not identify what items in the Las camaritas Rancho page that might be or not. I have over 35 citations in the piece linked to content as well as many inline links to other wikipedia pages. I don't believe that I have duplicated any content other than a portion of the first line verbatim from any other source - which I have changed this afternoon to make it read better.

so am confused or unclear on what items you are referring to, especially since the overall piece is quite large.

Since I'm unclear what items are concerned about I can only guess.

So any specifics would be helpfur.

If you are mentioning pictures which were all taken from Wikimedia, I assume that when each image is clicked on the image shows its source and usage, and is enough — Preceding unsigned comment added by Energynet (talkcontribs) 00:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Energynet. Sorry for nor being more clear. The article appears to contain material copied from "Muwekma Ohlone Tribe v. GALE A. NORTON, Secretary of the Interior and AURENE MARTIN, Acting Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs" (PDF). United States District Court for the District of Columbia. June 6, 2003. p. 7., which is okay to copy, because it's in the public domain, but you have to add attribution to let the reader know that the material is copied from that source and not prose that you wrote yourself. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 09:56, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
thank u so much for the useful information i will remember it while making my next edit Billthegreatest (talk) 06:12, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lotus Esprit GT1

Material will be added with reference. Only a chunk of information was added from the website as it is hard to research upon the said subject. U1Quattro (talk) 14:29, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment, but that doesn't make it okay to add copyvio. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:55, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Diannaa, could you scrub this edit from the history? It is a word for word copy of the subjects website. Thanks, Loopy30 (talk) 19:33, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. For what it's worth, Loopy30, using {{revdel}} (or the revdel script if you're so inclined) is probably a more efficient way to get copyright revdel'd. Primefac (talk) 19:51, 27 November 2017 (UTC) (talk page stalker)[reply]

poss copyvio

Hello! could you have a look please at the history section of Yarra Yarra Rowing Club, in which large sections match perfectly with this official web site. Here's the report. I'm not sure which came first, and leave it to your excellent opinion!198.58.171.47 (talk) 21:59, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thank you for the question. The oldest copy of that page on the Wayback Machine is dated February 22, 2015, and this tool shows the page was created November 30, 2009, and this tool shows a creation date of November 15, 2008. We have had the content since February 2, 2008, so if it's copyvio, I can't prove it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:39, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for letting me know, I am rewriting it in my own words now.

Symone--SymoneShah (talk) 00:19, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Mann

Hi Diannaa.

Thanks for the correction of my contribution to the Thomas Mann article. I will learn and do my best to follow the copyright rules.

I realize why the history of my edit containing copyrighted material is no longer available publicly, but it seems a bit impractical that Wiki doesn't allow me, the contributor, to review the miscopypasted and deleted piece. As otherwise I would have known exactly what was wrong.

Peace! Brandmajor (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can send you the removed material via email, but you will have to activate your Wikipedia email first. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:50, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

why you deleted my edits???

Hi dear, I am leenibraheem. what is the proplem you have deleted my editis for Nematosteela. i did not understand why/. this is my home work and i have to submit it Nov, 30. i did not copy or paralyze i put the references and the source of my two photo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Leenibraheem (talkcontribs) 15:44, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The content was removed because you added copyright material without any evidence of permission from the copyright holder. That's a violation of copyright law and the copyright policy of this website. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:49, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Centum Cellas

Thankyou Diannaa. Does the attribution show on the page (I cannot see it) or just in the history? Best regards Notafly (talk) 17:40, 29 November 2017 (UTC) PS If I have copied text before I cannot remember where. In the future I will attribute correctly.Some of my recent text is translated. I have to fix that too[reply]

Hi Notafly. The attribution shows in the edit history. This is considered a permanent record for attribution purposes. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:53, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou.That is very clear as is the necessity. Regards again Notafly (talk) 19:16, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Diannaa, could you check the "History" section added to this article in June 2017. It appears to be a copy & paste from a section titled "U.S.-ROMANIAN RELATIONS" in this article. Thanks. Woodlot (talk) 20:22, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Searching back to the earliest revision, I found it was a properly attributed copy of a US State Dept document (very different from the current version now present on the State Dept website). I have added the required attribution and removed some other copyvio and suspected copyvio from the article. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:00, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio from Rhine Revival

Hi there is a current sockpuppet investigation here about a banned user [2], on his latest sock he has edited the Joseph Banks Rhine article and added copyvio. On this account he added 844 words from a book, this seems excessive [3]. He also added a lot of other dubious material some of which looks like copyvio from some unreliable psychic papers. The user that is doing this is using a clever tactic. He reverts his material after he uploads it [4]. He does this so his controversial material is still stored in the Wikipedia database in an old version. He then links to his version off-Wikipedia. There is a current investigation about this on the SPI but I am just requesting if his edits could be striked or not. I believe the material he has uploaded should be removed. If I have made a mistake and it is not copyvio, then I apologize. Thanks. 117.20.41.10 (talk) 01:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]