User talk:Coren

Before you leave a message about CorenSearchBot leaving a template on your talk page:

• If you have copied text to which you own the copyright: Please read the guide to donating your own copyrighted material to Wikipedia. Note that, in addition to copyright requirements, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest.

• If you have been given permission to reuse someone else's text: Please read the guide to requesting and formalizing permission to use copyrighted works on Wikipedia. As above, the article must still comply with notability guidelines, advertising prohibition and avoid conflicts of interest.

• If you were attempting to rename an article or create a disambiguation page: Compliance with the GFDL requires that the article be actually moved rather than copied with cut-and-paste to preserve editing history. Please tag the new copy with {{db-move}} and an administrator will be able to assist you.

• If the original source was itself a copy of Wikipedia text: Reusing the text is probably okay, but make sure you link back to the original article to comply with the GFDL. If the site CSBot found is a Wikipedia mirror, you may want to notify me so I can add it to the list for the future.

• If the original source is in the public domain: Reusing the text is okay, but you almost certainly want to attribute it with an appropriate template (such as {{DANFS}} or {{1911}}); this will cause CSBot to leave the article alone.

  If you did attribute it with an appropriate template, but it was still flagged as a copyvio, then it's probable the bot does not know the template you have used. You might want to tell me on this page so I can add it to the list.

Otherwise, remember that text found on other web pages is copyrighted by default. Unless there is an explicit permission on the page (or site) allowing reuse without conditions (or under the GFDL) you can not use that text in a Wikipedia article!

Thank you!

((older cruft/undated messages moved to User talk:Coren/old stuff))

Lane Bryant

Since Lane Bryant, Inc. and Lena Himmelstein Bryant Malsin are two seperate entities, I split the page. I also added more information from other sources (such as the census). betselu 2-4-08

Xtrakter

Hi There,

You have deleted our page from Wikipedia, we are a market utility and are entitled to coverage.

We accepted that copying and pasting text was not sufficient so the section was amended and now you have blocked it again.

Please resolve this situation or provide agreeable edited text.

User: CapitalMarket

Nabari no Ou

Coren, the contents of the Nabari no Ou page in Wikipedia does not include a substantial copy of: http://www.xanadu-dreams.net/timcampi.html Your bot should take this into consideration.

RMLRAG212 (talk)

Lough Gara

• Lough Gara

I have got premission from the webmaster of http://www.ogara.org/ to use this information as it relates to Monasterdaen OzEire (talk) 15:16, 6 March 2008

Cathal Twomey

I recently editted the summary of Finding the Fox, which was at that time part of the aricle on the Shapeshifter series. When I had completed my editting, I realised that the summary was far too long not to be in an article of its own. I therefore created one. However, before I could remove the version of the summary from the Shapeshifter article, I recieved a complaint from Coren that my summary appeared to be a copy of the Shapeshifter article. I have since removed the summary from the Shapeshifter article, and the only version of it now exists in the Finding the Fox article. I apologise for any inconvenience I may have caused. User:Cathal Twomey, 31 March 2008

Your right

Yes I saw but the case is theres a no article about Dialog Telekom Limited but both Dialog Telekom Limited and Dialog Telekom is same companies you can remove Dialog Telekom Limited article i will modifly Milanka Price Index. Thank for assist... ShEsH (talk) 14:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Your Bot

Your bot has recently tagged a few album pages as "substantial copies" due to the track listings. Is there a way you can fix that? Undeath (talk) 20:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Conduct of Cheeser1

On November 28, 2007, you had blocked editor Cheeser1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for 31 hours due to edit warring. He received a reduced block as he promised not to do it again. He has repeated this trend and there is currently a WP:3RR for him [1]. Thank you for your time.Netkinetic ^(t/c/@) 21:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I've looked at your edit history, and the anon's. You do not want to involve me in that dispute, because I'm pretty certain you won't like the result. — Coren ^(talk) 22:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:RFA statement

(Let's keep this on your talk page, I get confused by double vision)  :-) — Coren ^(talk) 00:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Not sure where to put this

I was exploring the talk pages and found the ArbCom dispute involving Jersyko. I noticed that you informed several people of their involvement in the dispute, and that all claimants appear to have been permanently banned and therefore unable to argue.

In the case against Jersyko, it accused Tvoz/Bobblehead of being "meatpuppets" and indeed they have accused me of being a sockpuppet as well. I'm not sure if I should add this information to this ArbCom dispute - especially since Jersyko has not been directly involved as of yet.

One more thing, they requested and apparently received a "checkuser" request from Thatcher [2]. My question is, is this appropriate? A formal request not made, and this appears to have been a backchannel method for obtaining my IP address and seems to violate my privacy. I could really care less about my privacy, as long as I don't get hacked, but this seems inappropriate to me, especially if this has been a method of banning new users.

Sorry for throwing this on you, but you appear to be a neutral party (from a cursory glance at your history) and you seemed like a good person to ask about the under-the-table "checkuser." TheGoodLocust (talk) 05:04, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I wouldn't worry about it; it's common for checkusers to be done outside the normal process to avoid adding extra acrimony to an already involved process when there is already a discussion about some incident. You'll note that the checkuser (Thatcher in that case) did not reveal your IP, or indeed more than the fact that you were one state away from the (also undisclosed) state of the editor he checked you against. The Request for Checkuser process is there to give all the context to decide whether to make a checkuser when the request is "out of the blue", as it were, as opposed as within the context of some other incident. — Coren ^(talk) 12:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

A place in the dirt

There was no page so I posted the artist, album, and lyrics. There are other pages (not in wikipedia but on the web) with lyrics, but I decided to put it in one place. I ststed my source at the end of the lyrics. The page is probably removed. It should be up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gothrock4life (talk • contribs) 02:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

MEGAN

I don't know the ins and outs of publishing your own stuff on Wikipedia, so I just rewrote the guy's article to remove the copyright violation. How does this bot work? Can you ask it to check a particular article? --Blechnic (talk) 04:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Coren - greetings. The "bot" has flagged a very simple, one-line description of GenVec, a biopharmaceutical company, as possibly being a copyright violation because the one-liner is also linked to the company's website (www.genvec.com). There is no cause for concern -- GenVec is a publicly traded company, the website is a public access website, the one-liner is consistent with GenVec's publicly-distributed descriptions of itself, etc. etc. Please can you remove the bot's notice of concern? Thanks much - Umtalor

re: Speaker Junkies

--TeknoPunk (talk) 17:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)The biography and description for Speaker Junkies' submission is not a copyright infringement. It is the biography of the band and is available for publice use everywhere.

Confused on a bot message...

specifically this one. It's right... I created the museum article following a merge, and then I redirected the creator as I normally do per WP:MERGE, what did I do wrong that triggered bot? Thanks! TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 04:11, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: New BoyLover.net article

While this article is a substantial copy of information held at another site, I belive the content of the page is covered by the GFDL listed on the originating site. http://eng.anarchopedia.org

Ganymede 901 (talk) 16:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Harrison Potter

I have rewritten the Harrison Potter article to what I hope will be a suitable copyright standard. --Wrightjack (talk) 22:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

PHG

Coren, I would appreciate it if you would unblock PHG as immediately as you can find reason to. I will provide sufficient reason at his talk page within minutes. John J. Bulten (talk) 23:05, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

If there's no objections, I'm lifting the block. I'd like to see how the AfD is concluded, at the very least. Thx in advance for your cooperation. El_C 23:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay, it's been a little while and I don't wish to have the user remain blocked any longer while I await for a response, so I'm going ahead and unblocking. I'll reiterate my rational: there was an AfD opened first, and it, therefore, is the process that will determine whether there has been fabrication or gaming the rules. Had the AfD concluded this, I would take no issue with an indefinite block pending mentorship or whatever arrangement — but the block has taken place prior to such a finding. It also restricts the user from participating in this process. As admins, we have to follow our own rules. As long as the AfD remains open, it, in theory, can still vindicate the user's claim. El_C 00:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for no faster answer, El_C, I'm just back from work. Can you hold on on the unblock for ~10 minutes while I catch up, please? — Coren ^(talk) 00:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Eeep! One minute (or less). Talk about timing! — Coren ^(talk) 00:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry about that. Mere seconds. El_C 00:13, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

You should not have over-ruled me on unarchiving the AE report. That reflects poorly on you. El_C 00:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Let's agree to disagree on that. I don't beleive that discussion should be held anywhere else, and I don't agree that the AfD is relevant to the discussion to begin with. — Coren ^(talk) 01:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I think you're too inexperienced, and it shows. El_C 01:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I think that is being patronizing. Please keep this discussion on AE, on topic, and the tone a little more mature, alright? — Coren ^(talk) 01:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry you find it patronizing, such is not the intent. But you have already been cautioned about this before. El_C 01:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Coren, just to make sure that I am understanding the sequence of events here:

• 20:16 - Jehochman started the AE thread[3]
• 21:24 - You blocked PHG[4]
• 21:53 - El C put the AE thread "on hold" [5]
• 23:08 - El C told you the block should be lifted.[6]
• 00:11 - El C unblocked PHG[7]

Did you, Coren, at any point say that you were okay on El C unblocking PHG? Or did he just unilaterally overrule you? --Elonka 02:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

It's unfortunate Elonka cannot give it a rest. Anyway, Coren is on record stating: "were it not for the timing, I would have opposed the unblock." El_C 02:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, Coren said that at 00:43, after you'd already unblocked.[8] El C, what you did was a serious breach of administrator ethics. See WP:WHEEL, and please think hard about whether or not you feel that you are genuinely suited to keep on being an administrator. --Elonka 03:02, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

DHONG-DANG

Dear all,

My family is the owner of the DHONG-DANG Catering Service, so I would like to post my family business in this web to let the world knows about our first business of the family and it will keep going.

Thank you very much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChittakoneR (talk • contribs) 01:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)