User talk: Diannaa

 Skip to the bottom  ⇩  · It is 12:00 PM where this user lives in Alberta. ⁽⁾

Norma Redpath

HI Diannna, I understand that i should have modified the text rather than copy and paste , though they were just short parts....but i did add and correct a lot more than just those paragraphs, so is there anyway of recovering that edit so i can then go from there, and re-write the copied parts ?

Rohanstorey (talk)Rohan StoreyRohanstorey (talk) 04:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

The only parts I removed were the parts that were copied, as you can see by this diff. I can send the removed portions to you via email if you like. — Diannaa (talk) 10:25, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

ok thanks yes now i can see what changes were made and you're right ! Rohanstorey (talk) 01:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello

You could have just edited the words, rather than removing them. I'll find the information again and edit it to fit and then do it, since you couldn't be arsed to.--DowntonAbbeyFan (talk) 14:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, — Diannaa (talk) 17:52, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Help creating acceptable addition to Svchost.exe article

Hello Dianna, I noticed your removal of my additions to the Svchost.exe article. As the information currently in the article is no longer up-to-date, I would like to re-add the information in a way that doesn't cause any copyright issues. As I'm inexperienced in contributing to Wikipedia, I would appreciate some help though. The first few sentences of my addition, I paraphrased from the source text that I cited. Would it be OK to add those sentences to the article? I followed then with a few bullets that detailed the information and were directly copied from the original article. I can imagine that that is too much copying. On the other hand, the list is a very precise summary and any edits to the wording would make the information less precise. So the only thing I can do then is to remove the bullet text at all? Or is there a way to include the exact list that would not make it an copyright infringement? You could have just edited the words, rather than removing them. I'll find the information again and edit it to fit and then do it, since you couldn't be arsed to. Also, can you send me the original addition I made so I can start working from that wording instead of having to start all over again? Thanks for your response. Regards, Beat Nideröst (talk) 14:18, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Your initial addition was identical to the source document https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/application-management/svchost-service-refactoring so you can work from that. Sorry but I am under no obligation to re-write the content for you. The article was one of around forty I assessed this morning; this represents four hours work on my part. So re-writing all those additions that had to be removed today would have consumed double or triple the time, i.e. eight or twelve or more hours per day every day working on Wikipedia. I can't do that, because it would destroy my health, so sorry. I see you have written a short summary of the removed content, which is great. If you can't figure out a way to write the material in your own words, you will have to leave it out, as to add material copied from elsewhere online is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy.— Diannaa (talk) 14:52, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. Sorry for the "arsed" part. I didn't mean to write that, it was a sentence of the previous person that talked to you which ended up in my comment somehow (probably because of an error of me). Of course you have no obligation to re-write the content for me! -Beat Nideröst (talk) 11:38, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

I thought it was rude when they said it too. — Diannaa (talk) 11:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Help

Hello Dear Dinna Thank you for reading the article on Posterrorism. Should this article be deleted? This is an internationally recognized event. Please let me know. I respect the opinion of the wikipedia managers Thank you --Hesamlv (talk) 16:58, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

The article probably qualifies for speedy deletion as a non-notable event. Someone will be along soon to assess it.— Diannaa (talk) 11:49, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Dear Diannaa So please test all aspects. With a search on the name of this event on Google you can see its popularity Thanks --Hesamlv (talk) 12:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

You need to find secondary sources that cover the topic in-depth ("widely covered in diverse sources"). Please see WP:EVENTCRIT for how to establish notability for an event.— Diannaa (talk) 12:28, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Copyright?

Hi, Regarding your message about my edits on 1883 FA Cup Final, I must clarify that I did not copy the content in textual form (in fact, I wrote it with my own words), apart of having cited the corresponding source.

Therefore I don't understand why you removed that content so I did not infringe any copyright at all. On the other hand, it's a pity that you have erased all the previous edits (unless there is a way to recover that content so you can verify what I say is true) - Fma12 (talk) 14:27, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. The only thing I did was remove the copied content; no other edits were disturbed. You can see that by checking this diff. — Diannaa (talk) 18:28, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

‪Managing a conflict of interest: Clarification by KaiserViriatus

Dear Dianaa,

Thank you very much for your message and help. Your help is quite valuable to us!

I would like to point that, regardless that I am currently employed as a research assistant under André Freire’s supervision, the biographical text can be all certified through his University’s institutional website (http://cies.iscte-iul.pt/np4EN/equipa/?i=467) and through his institutional Online Curriculum Vitae (https://ciencia.iscte-iul.pt/authors/andre-renatoleonardo-neves-dos-santos-freire/cv). Nearly all publications (all except two old ones in a Portuguese journal of wide diffusion) may also be checked through web links (which I’m available to send you through email, if you so please, and to add to the page we’ve been talking about). Moreover, I dully declare that I have no conflict of interest in this domain because, on the one hand, I did this on a total voluntary base, without any intervention and following any request of André Freire, and, on the other hand as mentioned, all information contained in the proposed webpage is factual and can be easily cross validated.

As such, all the information available on the Draft page is factual, which means that, on my opinion, there’s no conflict of interest, as it is. My objective, with this page, is to inform in a concise and rigorous way, and not to simply divulge work. The page is of a notable person, who’s been working for decades on relevant issues, such as Ideologies, Political Parties, Economic Crises, Political Behaviour and others, thus, I see this page creation and publication as an important tool for students, professors, researchers, journalists, politicians and common citizens interested to reach relevant information in a quicker and more efficient manner.

As to me, as an ISCTE employee, I am also providing a link with a signed PDF with a solemn declaration (please check here my Solemn Declaration about the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solemn_Declaration_Wikipedia_VQ_Signed.pdf) of why the information provided is true (and above all can be cross checked), and that my personal opinions or institutional affiliation do not affect the information contained in this proposed Wikipedia webpage about André Freire. I am not being contracted to construct this page, but I am building it since I judge it to be an important tool, in terms of science and mass media communication (please check here my Solemn Declaration about the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Solemn_Declaration_Wikipedia_VQ_Signed.pdf). I am also prepared to disclose the “Connected Contributor declaration” (which I’ve already done in the Talk link: [1]).

I hope this message helps clarify our work. Thank you very much for your help, once again,

Best,

KaiserViriatus (Viriato Queiroga)

KaiserViriatus (talk) 20:17, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

PS: sorry for the edit: I had forgotten about the tiles (~)

If you still intend to add material already previously published online, you need to see WP:donating copyrighted materials for instructions. There's a sample email at WP:Consent. If you are being paid to edit Wikipedia, you need to add a declaration to that effect on your user page or user talk page. Please see WP:PAID for instructions.— Diannaa (talk) 00:18, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply! First a question: Is there a way for me to get notifications for this page? Because I was waiting, and I did not receive an email.

I'll be studying the links you posted. As to being paid to edit Wikipedia: I am not, I'm doing it on my own initiative. If you still think that I should write a declaration of some sort about it (besides the one you've already posted) please let me know. Thank you! Best, KaiserViriatus (talk) 16:02, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

You could add my talk page to your watchlist. See Help:Watchlist for details on how to use your watchlist.— Diannaa (talk) 19:08, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! Will do! KaiserViriatus (talk) 17:43, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at WP:ELN#Citation link question

 You are invited to join the discussion at WP:ELN#Citation link question. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:55, 24 March 2020 (UTC)Template:Z48

My edits

They were actually from Sir John Dewhurst’s book - as hyperlinked. DowntonAbbeyFan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

DowntonAbbeyFan, the quotations were okay to add, but not the surrounding prose, whether from the website where I found it or from a book published in 1984, which still enjoys copyright protection.— Diannaa (talk) 13:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Principles for Digital Development

Hi Dianna. I'm trying to edit the Principles for Digital Development wikipedia page. I understand you removing the descriptions of the Principles and the youtube video, I am working with my team to get a Creative Commons license fixed so we can post on wikipedia. But you also removed the list of endorsers that I carefully and painstakingly cultivated. Can you explain to me why? I don't want to spend all day putting those back in just to have you remove them again. Thanks Abigail.shirley (talk) 13:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

I didn't remove that - it was removed by a bot because of the YouTube link. The bot posted a message on your talk page as to why this was done.— Diannaa (talk) 13:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Abigail.shirley. I'm wondering if you could clarify what you mean when you say I am working with my team because to me that sounds like you might have some kind of connection to the subject of the article Principles for Digital Development that goes beyond something that's merely casual. I've added some information about conflict of interest editing to your user talk page just in case you do have such a connection; if you do, then please take the time to carefully read through it and do your best to follow the guidelines listed as closely as possible. You need to be particularly careful if your editing falls under Wikipedia:Paid-contributions disclosure because undisclosed "paid" or "compensated" contributions are not allowed per the Wikimedia Foundation's wmf:Terms of Use. COI/PAID editing is highly discourage by Wikipedia, but it's possible to do both as long as relevant guidelines and policies are being met. There are quite a number of editors who have successfully figured out a way to do such a thing, but many more who haven't who have ended up having their accounts blocked as a result. Please try and understand that I'm not trying to scare you off of Wikipedia; I'm just trying to let know about something that you might not be aware of since your account is so new and since all of your edits so far seemed focused on this one particular article. Some other pages you might want to look at are Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause because you might find them informative and helpful as well.

As for the long list of companies you've re-added to the article, I don't really think it's something appropriate for the article per WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Long lists of endorsement-like content like this are usually the kinds of things you'd find on some organization's official website, but an official website and a Wikipedia article are not the same thing and such content at least gives off the appearance of being somewhat promotional. So, it might be better to scrap the list and develop more prose type content instead. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:59, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

copyright questions

Hi Diana, I see that you have removed all of my edits from the page Sarah Morris. I did not realize that text could not be copied even when a citation was provided, so I apologize for that. However, I am frustrated that ALL of the changes I made to the page were deleted. I updated the "Personal Life" section to better reflect the artist's education, like providing the artist's major at Brown University. I cited a biography that included this information. Why was this deleted? Additionally, I changed the wording from "a stint at Cambridge University" to something that was more encyclopedic and informative in its phrasing. Why was this deleted? Lastly, I updated a few lists, including the artist's solo exhibitions (under Exhibitions) and Public Collections to provide a more comprehensive list; currently, the lists are not comprehensive. Why were these changes deleted? My changes, all cited, increased the accuracy of the lists, and to revert them only makes them less factual and representative. Lastly, I updated the "Further Reading" section with additional texts. Why were these changes deleted? I would greatly appreciate more information on all of this. I am a student researching this artist and I am new to Wikipedia. I am greatly frustrated by the deletion of all of the content I updated, all of which provided more coherent and comprehensive information on the artist. Fetterw (talk) 14:41, 26 March 2020 (UTC)Witt

It was removed by another editor with this edit. The edit summary says that "Artspace.com is not a WP:RS, but a selling site "— Diannaa (talk) 18:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Non-free files size

Hi Diannaa, I was wondering if you could provide what the hxw guideline is for non-free images? The one I question is File:Los Angeles Chargers logo.svg as it is currently 455x201px. I usually keep them under 300x300 but another user is saying the current size is fine. Any guidance on this would be helpful! Thanks, Corky 18:53, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

The bot will multply the two dimensions. 455 x 201 = 91455, so this pic is okay, as it comes in under the 100,000 pixel limit. — Diannaa (talk) 18:57, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Corky 19:02, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Copyright issue

Hi Dianna,

Thank you for the information provided by you on my talk page in regards to the copyrighted content with respect to Mirza Shirazi.

Just to clarify, I copied the content as it was basically a "good translation" of the content about Mirza Shirazi from original sources (Arabic books). So none of the information from the Iranica page is actually original (it's information from books in Arabic, just translated), but I understand that, that is not how it works with copyright. Apologies for that.

However, the content deleted is a mix of copied content and my personal writing, so would it be possible that you grant me access to my old revision, so I can take out the copied information and keep my own please? Because it seems you have deleted a few revisions as I can see on the history page. Also when I edit Wikipedia articles, I do it all in the visual editing section, and not like an outside Word document, so I don't have the article saved anywhere else.

Kind regards - Sourceofgrace Sourceofgrace (talk) 19:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

I am sending you a copy via email.— Diannaa (talk) 19:36, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Another copyright issue!

Hello Diannaa,

I come bearing another copyright problem for you, thanks in advanced for any help/suggestions. I was encouraged to reach out to you by SandyGeorgia about extensive plagiarism of copyrighted material I found while editing the page HIV/AIDS in China beginning a few weeks ago. At the time--and up until now--I was unaware there was a way to really handle it besides wholesale rollback or manual deletion of the offending content (which I have since done, more or less; 85.3% of the text as it stands was written by me. I was not aware the offending material also had to be purged from the revision record. I imagine that is something beyond the scope of my powers, so I wanted to see what initiating that process would entail. I tried to document what I found in all my edit summaries and as best as I could in Talk:HIV/AIDS in China after the fact. If there is any other information from me you need, please let me know and I can get an additional writeup of some sort to you ASAP. Thank you very much! WhinyTheYounger (talk) 21:32, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi WhinyTheYounger and thank you very much for your hard work cleaning this article. The majority if not all of the content you removed was added way back in 2007, so I don't think it's appropriate to hide all those hundreds of intervening edits that took place in the intervening years. So I won't be doing revision deletion.— Diannaa (talk) 22:01, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Question on Richard I of England

Hi! I wasn't really sure who to ask so I hope this is not an issue. I noticed that Richard the 1st is still a class c article, with the rest of the Plantagenet monarchs being good or featured. Is there a reason for this? As in, is this the result of a lack of nomination(s) or are there some issues with the page? I'd love to edit and improve the page but it seems pretty thorough already. So if you could point me in the right direction, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks Aza24 (talk) 06:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Hello Aza24 and thank you for your interest in improving this important article. There's sixteen "Citation needed" tags on the page – that's what's holding it back from advancement to "B" Class, which is the next step. If you can locate and add sources that cover the sections that are currently without sources, please do so, and then I suggest requesting an assessment for B-class at the Military History wikiproject.

Good Articles and Featured Articles go through a formal assessment process. Please see Wikipedia:Good articles and for Featured Articles see Wikipedia:Featured articles.— Diannaa (talk) 11:28, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Sezer777

I'm afraid that most, if not all, of this user's edits other than those at the Turkish transport article are bogus. Assuming that none of them is necessary even if not incorrect, and given how much effort it would take to review all of them, does it make sense to do a blanket reversion? Largoplazo (talk) 16:50, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Here is the list. All his edits to Geographical regions of Turkey and Galata Tower have already been removed by other people. If you have time to check a few that would be great. — Diannaa (talk) 16:55, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Message from Joe

HI Diannaa,

Thank you very much for your feedback, I am trying to delete this and re-create a brand new one, How can i delete it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeMesmar (talk • contribs) 18:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC) How can i delete it?

JoeMesmar, it has already been deleted.— Diannaa (talk) 18:06, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

I have another question Diannaa, I would love it if you could assist me further into getting my Article approved to Wikipedia, but of course by providing all exclusive details & without violating any rules over here. Is there a way i can reach you for this matter? My account is old, but I barely know how to function over here haha :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeMesmar (talk • contribs) 18:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa,

I would love your help on finalizing my Article, one of the editors rejected everything about me as i provided legitimate information. I listed so many sources and information about me to prove my work. Is there a way i can reach you via email or anywhere else? I have a huge feeling that you can help me out on this one :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeMesmar (talk • contribs) 18:14, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't have time to help you with this.— Diannaa (talk) 18:57, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

No worries! I wish you all the best with your... busy schedule. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JoeMesmar (talk • contribs) 20:06, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Creative commons sources

Hi Diannaa. Would you mind looking at this creative commons image which I just uploaded at Commons. A lot of open access sources like this have been appearing lately in marine biology with comprehensive diagrams and elaborate summary captions. These diagrams can provide excellent graphical summaries in Wikipedia articles. But I am not clear what the limits to acceptable use are here. I have used the example image I just gave you on Marine food web, and have included, unabridged, the caption from the original source. Since I am finding and uploading rather a lot of images like this at the moment, would you mind looking at the manner in which I uploaded this particular image, and also at the manner in which I am using the image and its caption in this Wikipedia article. This is a rather extreme case, but in cases like this, I am unclear what best practice would be and just how far boundaries can be pushed before they become a problem. Would you please advise me. — Epipelagic (talk) 00:49, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi Epipelagic, good to hear from you, hope you are well. I love that so many journal articles and wonderful images such as this one are now available for us to use. CC-by-4.0 is a compatible license both for prose and for images. It's okay to copy the caption (or other prose from a compatibly-licensed article), but we need to provide attribution. This can be done either by using a {{CC-notice}} template or manually like I did here. — Diannaa (talk) 11:24, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Ah, that was what I wanted to hear and needed to know. Thank you very much. — Epipelagic (talk) 18:58, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio William Colbert Keady

Hello Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of potential copyright content in the William Colbert Keady article. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 19:21, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

I think it was added just today. It still shows a lot of overlap but it's okay now. — Diannaa (talk) 22:36, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Reference templates

Hi Diannaa, I appreciate you're just applying a reference template to Black Lady and Black Maria (card game), but they were both being used as examples of the problem I have raised with Template:Sfn at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Please revert your edits while the discussion is ongoing so that editors can see what the issue is. Once there's a resolution, I'm totally happy for your edits to be reinstated, but for now they're illustrating an issue.Bermicourt (talk) 19:36, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

People can see the old revisions simply by looking in the page history. — Diannaa (talk) 20:35, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

But why would they assume they needed to do that? Anyway I've added a note to say "look at the history"; and the offending edit has been reverted in the face of widespread opposition to it. Bermicourt (talk) 16:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Regardless of whether or not the edit to the sfn template is reverted (this has not yet actually taken place), there's a lot of clean-up to be done. For example Black Lady is still showing citations to six different source books that are not mentioned in the bibliography (the five that are highlighted in red, plus Kansil). I for one am glad that citation errors were highlighed - I found one on Adolf Hitler that had been there for circa six years. The rest of the articles I've worked on were clean.

Your fellow Wikipedians are pretty savvy; folks know to check the page history if they see something unexpected.— Diannaa (talk) 17:47, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Copyvio at Bill Clinton

Hello Diannaa. I was wondering if you could remove this copyvio at Bill Clinton. Thanks. --Wow (talk) 21:40, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Revision deletion done. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 22:38, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

I take exception

I cannot stress how much your suppressing the log plot at State number of non-repatriated cases by date shocks me. You could have moved it. You could have duplicated it into two versions. You could have explained it. But you didn't. The best representation for showing positive and negative trends - relief or panic - and your reaction was deprive of information and unembarrass a government. Brava! Shenme (talk) 19:59, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

The explanation was in my edit summary: "remove deceptive logarithmic scale for total cases - most people will not realise, and will end up being misinformed." Most people don't know much about math, and will not realise the implications of a logarithmic scale, or how it distorts the curve. The log scale gives the impression that the cases have increased along a flat line, whereas the increase has actually been exponential. It should look like a hockey stick curve, not a flat line. — Diannaa (talk) 20:08, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Addison Maine

• Addison, Maine (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• URL visual comparison from source: addisonmaine.org
• diff when originally added December 2007

Can you please take a look at this article, the copyvio detector says 0.0%, and the URL comparison times out before any data can be retrieved from the source. But a visual comparison between the source and the following sections clearly indicate that it is copied verbatim: early settlement, key dates in history, mayhew library, quarries, schools, shipyards, historic buildings, cemeteries, historic and archaeological resources. I didn't see a copyright notice on the source, but it does use references that may be copyrighted. I stumbled across this article fixing a ref error, someone had added a name to the Notable people section using whitepages.com, then I noticed all the unsourced section tags and investigated, it just looked suspicious. Thanks in advance, (hope you are staying safe). Isaidnoway (talk) 22:05, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

I am getting good results with CopyLeaks as an interim tool until Earwig's is repaired. I will clean the article. Thanks for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 22:51, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Deletion request for article on Dorien Herremans

I noticed that you have removed my deletion proposal for this article. The article was written by the professor herself and all links point to her own websites. Such biography should be reserved for well-known people and Wikipedia should never be used as mean of self-promotion as mentioned in Wikipedia policy, which is evidently the case for this article. I have reverted the deletion request and properly formatted it. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mywikieditor2219 (talk • contribs) 01:37, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

The article does not qualify for speedy deletion under any of our criteria for speedy deletion. Please follow either the procedure at WP:PROD or WP:AFD to propose the article for deletion.— Diannaa (talk) 02:01, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Dealing with an editor who doesn't (know how to) communicate

User:NABFNJ has made about 500 total edits. All seem to be in good faith, if not based on an understanding of how Wikipedia works. You have made copyvio warnings here and here. The editor has also made edits that remove sourced content based on misunderstandings (including this edit, this edit and this one). You and I have left warnings on the user's talk page, but the editor has never responded. I have explained my edits in edit summaries, to no avail. I have also left comments inside the article in the hope that the editor would see the text, but no luck.

How can I communicate with a good-faith editor who doesn't seem to know how to communicate? Any ideas? Alansohn (talk) 02:40, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

He's never made a talk page post or user talk page post. I don't usually handle that sort of problem - I don't know what to do. Maybe a talk page watcher knows how to get things started? Or try a different admin?— Diannaa (talk) 02:49, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Edits on the Stasi page

Hello! I saw that you left a comment on my talk page saying that the edits I made on the Stasi page represented a violation of copyrights, so you reverted them. Can I please ask you why? I actually rephrased the text taken from the source, but I am new on Wikipedia, so I am still learning how it works. I may have missed something. Thank you for your time and insights. Seemona97 (talk) 09:23, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

At least some of the content was copied from http://communistcrimes.org/en/node/118. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. The material was actually removed by another editor with the edit summary "unsourced/improperly sourced".— Diannaa (talk) 11:16, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Indiaca

Hello! The new text is on the talk. Better?

In my home town Meßstetten Germay is a new book: Page 277 Oskar Riegraf 20. 4 1945 Oskar Riegraf * 19.07.1911,+under wrong name in Canada) killed 2 persons.

It's not a very good addition fora couple reasons. (1) It's a bunch of bulleted lists instead of prose. Prose would be more informative. For example,saying "Rules" with a link to the rules - in German- is not very informative, because this is the English-language Wikipedia, and most of our readers do not speak German. (2) Your English language skills do not seem to be very good, which means even where you did write prose, it's difficult to understand.— Diannaa (talk) 19:22, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

References

One problem are the rules:

• hobby tournament in Germany -tournament rules
• old rules(CVJM, FKK, Feuerwehr. Turnerbund)
• International Indiaca Association Rules( in Germany used on Master tournaments) used in Japan, not in the USA2003:D2:2F4D:7C12:576:2857:CEB7:F600 (talk) 11:42, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

help

Hello Dear Diannaa I wrote an article and am completing it. The administrator has removed this article as a candidate. In my opinion, this person is famous in his field. I've put together a list of its titles and award along with the source. Please help improve this article and stay there Thanks --Hesamlv (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Sorry I don't have time to help with this project.— Diannaa (talk) 19:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Imavailable's attempt to become available again

Thanks for your answer to my post at User talk:Imavailable, relating to the unblock request there. Here are a few thoughts that were prompted by your post. You may or may not find them interesting.

I was interested to read your comment "I suspect if unblocked he will not even resume editing". I have found over the years that a truly remarkable number of blocked editors post several unblock requests, and work quite hard at trying to get unblocked, but when the unblock comes they never edit again. I won't be at all surprised if you turn out to be right.

You said "I'm not sure he really understands our copyright rules". I would go further: I am sure he doesn't, but I thought that if he sticks to his undertaking "I'll never use contents from any site" it wouldn't matter whether he understands it or not. However, re-reading his comment, I'm now not sure he didn't mean "I'll never use contents from any site ... which is non-compatible", in which case a failure to understand copyright rules could well produce a faulty idea of what is and what isn't "compatible".

I'll ask him for an unambiguous undertaking not to copy anything at all, and if he gives it I will consider whether to unblock. I admit that unblocking is unlikely to actually benefit the project, as he doesn't seem to have any interest in doing anything other than self-promotion, so very likely he will either never edit again (as you suggest), or continue to try to self-promote. However, in the first of those two cases it doesn't matter in the least whether we unblock or not, and in the second case we can just re-block, so not much will be lost. I am a great believer in giving second chances to blocked editors, more so, I find, than most administrators; however, on the other hand I am also more of a believer than many administrators that when an editor has been given a second chance and thrown it away then it's time to say "enough is enough". JBW (talk) 21:32, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Question on citations

Hi,

I just had some quick questions:

1. In the Hector Berlioz article, there are no citations in the intro. This surprised me as it is a featured article. Is this because if the same info is cited later and simply repeated in the intro you don't have to cite it? Or are there supposed to be citations?

2. And also I keep referring to Wikipedia page's opening paragraphs as "intros" is there a standardized term for the indtroductionary paragraphs on a Wikipedia article?

3. If I see a statement that needs a citation or a reference, can I enter a "citation needed/reference need" template thing? Or can only administrators/extended confirmed users do so?

Sorry for all the questions and thanks in advanced, Aza24 (talk) 00:31, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Aza24, these are good questions. We call the introductory section the "lead section" or "lead" (you might also see it spelled "lede"). The lead is supposed to be a summary of the article. This means that everything in the lead should also be present somewhere else in the article. If the article is done properly (as is mandatory in Featured Articles, Good Articles, and A-Class articles), each statement should have a supporting citation. Since the citation is already present in the body of the article, typically you won't see the citation repeated in the lead unless it's a quotation or a statement that is controversial or likely to be challenged.

It's okay for anybody to add "citation needed" tags to articles, but don't add them to the lead (especially please be careful with Featured Articles, Good Articles or A-Class articles) unless you are sure that the statement is not supported by a citation elsewhere in the article. — Diannaa (talk) 00:52, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Clarification on Battle of Kendari

Hi,

Regarding the draft for the Battle of Kendari, I was just about to add the citations when you removed them. The sources are already listed in the reference as well for your information, so thanks, if gratitude are due at some point. Sam Samuel Pattinasarane 01:14, 1 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sampattinasarane (talk • contribs)

Sampattinasarane: You can't copy directly from your source document, because to do so is a violation of our copyright policy. That's why I removed it.— Diannaa (talk) 02:15, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Can you clarify which part did I copy directly from the source, since I have retyped the source that I received into the article and not copy them directly. Samuel Pattinasarane 02:23, 1 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sampattinasarane (talk • contribs)

It looked like quite a bit of it, and I strongly suspected the remainder was copied from elsewhere as well, so I removed the entire addition.— Diannaa (talk) 02:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

The Thiyyar Regiment of British Indian Army

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Thiyya_Regiment

Hi,

I have provided every references available , since it was formed during 1910 and disbanded in before 1936,that too as a regional regiment at thallassery , i didn't find much places in books regarding indian history or army.

But does it mean it doesn't exists ?

it was there on wikipedia , but deleted as the user created was blocked . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Othayoth shankaran (talk • contribs) 03:25, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry but there's nothing I can do to help with this. — Diannaa (talk) 09:55, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Massive copyvio in Makassar Malay

Hi Diannaa! I don't know the exact way to report copyvios, but since I have seen that you often deal with this problem, I want to bring the following case to your attention.

Recently an editor turned the redirect Makassar Malay into a full article, resorting however to blatant copyvio, copypaste from other articles without attribution, and unsourced data (possibly OR, but I suspect another copyvio without citation).

• The second para of the lead, the sections "History" and "Characteristics" are 100% verbatim from Jukes (2019), A Grammar of Makasar: A Language of South Sulawesi, Indonesia
• "Phonetics" is taken from Makassarese language with minimal adaptation.
• "Grammar" is unsourced.

I think TNT back to redirect is the best solution here, with the copyvio edits struck out from the hist. Jukes (2019) is a good source for the topic, but that should be started from anew in a way conforming to WP policies. –Austronesier (talk) 11:24, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

I've cleaned up the article and warned the user. Whether or not the article should be turned back into a redirect is a decision I don't want to make, as I don'tknow anything about the topic. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa (talk) 11:40, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Great, many thanks for the quick action! Ok, I will vet the remaining content, and decide how to proceed. The sourced intro is from the main article Malay trade and creole languages, but everything else is unsourced. The topic is within my range here on WP, and also tangentially related to my research IRL. It's still underpublished in RS. Have a great day! –Austronesier (talk) 11:51, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Re: Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Re: Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Hi Diannaa, thanks for the help and the advice. I'll keep that in mind for my future editing. Best! Ivan