User talk:Diannaa

 Skip to the bottom  ⇩  ·

Text from USDA proceedings

Hi Diannaa, I have a quick question: Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area incorporates text from https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/21886, which indicates that it is PD because it was written by U.S. Government employees. However, the author actually works for the Tasmanian government. Do you think this is one of those situations where they agreed to release their work into the public domain when they submitted it? Thanks, DanCherek (talk) 14:43, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

A good question. The statement "This article was written and prepared by U.S. Government employees on official time, and is therefore in the public domain" leads me to believe that it is indeed public domain. That's because this page states that "Some materials on the USDA Web site are protected by copyright, trademark, or patent, and/or are provided for personal use only. Such materials are used by USDA with permission, and USDA has made every attempt to identify and clearly label them." So we have to assume since they have not identified the document as copyright, that it is indeed PD.— Diannaa (talk) 14:51, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Makes sense. Thank you! DanCherek (talk) 14:54, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Text for Coronation Island

Specifically what text do you believe is in violation of copyright? sbelknap (talk) 15:52, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Please have a look at this comparison, where the overlapping text is highlighted. You removed some of it yourself, and I removed the rest in a subsequent edit.— Diannaa (talk) 18:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hi Dianna. I had read in detail your guidelines on Wikipedia and Copyright and thank your efforts for highlighting the policies in detail. It has been my efforts always to follow these guidelines while editing any article to present them in neutral and independent point of view and different from the references while not disturbing the opinion.

• As I prefer independent writing I would never prefer to copy or translate any information from the source but in case such event comes than I will follow the guidelines given by you putting as a direct quotation with double quotation(") marks in addition to citing the source with inline citation. Will have a refresher learning session from links provided by you in this regard.
• The paraphrasing is done by me after giving lot of thought for any article while edit. Every edit is made to avoid copyright problems and following the guidelines given in Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Also observe each article to see that it is not original research.
• Have never used the copyrighted images and in case I have to use in future will surely follow the guidelines and see that the fairly used images will follow the wikipedia guidelines for the criteria.Will go through them again to have a fair reminder of the policies.
• Currently dont have the privilege of owning the copyright of any source. However understanding wiki policies on donating copyrighted materials will be helpful for future.
• Never involved myself in copying or translating any of Wikipedia articles. However will go through the guidelines for Copying and translation for understanding wiki policies in this regard.

I appreciate your time and efforts for highlighting the above guidelines as refresher and will be thankful if you have any particular edit of mine in your knowledge not following any of the above guidance.Gardenkur (talk) 14:01, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Is there any way I can have all my post removed?

I mean all of them... I got into a bit of a tiff with some posters and well, it didn't go smoothly.

I only have a few things up and I would love to have them all and I mean all removed. I don't want to be involved with Wikipedia any longer. I would really appreciate it if you could. Let me know. Maurice Mo Jordan (talk) 01:10, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

No, sorry, that's not going to happen.— Diannaa (talk) 02:03, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Can I know why? I heard you can ask to have post removed. According to others, my post are not correct, so why keep them up? I want to leave Wiki all together and I would like my post removed cause they are helping no one and no one is interested in them. So just a bit of clarification instead of "that's not going to happen." I just looked this up and it states "only administrators can delete them." So that means you can... but won't? Just help me understand why. Thanks (Sorry, I'm not the best at typing) Maurice Mo Jordan (talk) 06:51, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

1. We don't remove talk page posts that have already been replied to. Removing your replies to other people's posts is not something we typically do either, even if no one has yet replied. So that's why we can't remove your talk page posts. It looks like your recent additions to articles have already been removed for various reasons.
2. Stripping out other people's posts along with your own, like you did at Talk:Three tramps and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, is disruptive and inappropriate.
3. Any content you add here is released under license. In some respects that means that you give up some control over what happens to it.
4. Removing your posts and deleting them are two different things. Anyone can remove content, but only admins can delete. Please see the revision deletion policy to find out more about the types of things administrators are allowed to delete. Deleting a user's posts on their say-so is not on the list of things we are allowed to do.
5. If you want to leave Wikipedia, just go already. I see you are blocked, so this is a good opportunity for you to walk away and not edit Wikipedia any more.— Diannaa (talk) 17:29, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Help re Doping in China

(Redacted)

Hi. You have deleted the text above. Because of copyright. I am not familiar with the rules. Can you help me? Rewrite this text in a way that suits Wikipedia and leave me a message to add to the article. English is not my mother tongue. For the first time, help me to do it myself next time. Is there a site that can change the English text for Wikipedia (automatically) that is, leave the synonyms for us. Thank you and appreciate you. --CemasoV (talk) 12:14, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

I have removed the copyright material from my talk page; it's not appropriate to add it here. Using machine translations is not a good way to create content to add to Wikipedia either. Showing you how to re-write this one edit is not going to give you the skills to write content for Wikipedia, especially if English is not your first language. My suggestions: Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording 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. Select the parts of the text that you feel are most important to cover, and leave out the less important details. 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 Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students.— Diannaa (talk) 17:12, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

St Mary's Church, Swansea

Diannaa (talk) Can I ask Why you Removed Something that the Church Provided to the Local Council that would make us the Church hold the original Copyright — Preceding unsigned comment added by TerrydatRealterryo (talk • contribs)

Please follow the links place on your talk page that have information regarding Wikipedia's copyright policies. In short, we don't accept copyrighted content, period. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 00:10, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Ingush people

Dianna could you please evaluate the behavior of the following Chechen User:Reiner Gavriel who trashes the "Ingush People" page. He registered 07 June 2020, didn't contribute much to Wikipedia. He threatens and falsely accuses me. I did research on Ingush for over 30 years and provided only referenced academic sources from the USA, Germany, England, Scotland, Russia etc. Here his latest false accusation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Kavkas#Form_of_nationalist_disruptive_editing_on_Ingush_people_and_Ingushetia Brief description of the problem: Ingush are a minority of Russia, Ingushetia is the smallest state in Russia the result of ethnic cleansings, multiple landgrabs, and exiles of the Ingush people. As demonstrated by 1944 genocide, recent 1992 war over Prigorodny and the 2018 land swap deal with Chechnya, both North Ossetia and Chechnya seek to further carve up Ingushetia between the two republics, with backing from the Russian federal government. In contemporary times, both Chechnya and North Ossetia try to bolster their claims to Ingushetia through cultural and historical erasure in their educational materials, along with other forms of propaganda.Kavkas (talk) 03:36, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Please refrain from throwing such accusations against me while trying to make me look like as if I have any political or ethnical intentions. Your account was registered in 2013 and your edit count doesn't surpass mine by a lot. You have vandalised, like several sockpuppets before, the Ingush people article with dubious claims, backed up by dubious sources. For example, >under the pretext of defense of lowland Ingush people from vassal Chechen, Kabardin, Dagestan and Nogai attacks, which were orchestrated by Russia< and >After multiple losses of Imam Shamil at the end of Caucasian War, Russians and Chechens unify their forces<. Also, your edits are either not sourced or only poorly sourced. You also contradict yourself constantly, >Vakhushti of Kartli wrote in 1745, that the inhabitants of the village Angushti were Sunni Muslims.< - >(1810) The rest of Ingush highland clans one by one joined Russia next decades. Religion-wise Ingushetia mostly pagan with Christian and Muslim minorities.<. You have vandalised the article with what looks to me like an attempt of nationalist editing. The article has been attacked by sockpuppets with the exact same information prior. I have kindly asked you to revert the article back to it's last non-vandalised state. I will have to report you for vandalism. Reiner Gavriel (talk) 04:03, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Dear vandalizer. You claim you have no knowledge of Russian language yet you put false quotes from Yakovlev's book "Ingusi", you falsely claim that Russian scientist Krupnov was talking about Vainakh architecture yet in Russian he was talking about Ingush architecture in his book "Middleage Ingushetia". I am a fluent Russian speaker and I've read both books. Now, you also added the phallic picture which has no relation to the current Ingush religion. Only Chechen nationalists use it to accuse Muslim Ingush or worshiping the phallic statue. I've done the research on both Chechen and Ingush, edited both of the pages. Calm down. You hatred toward the Ingush people is obvious.Kavkas (talk) 12:28, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict)"Vandalism" has a specific meaning on Wikipedia. These edits do not appear to be vandalism but rather a content dispute. The first thing that should happen is a discussion on the article talk pages. If that doesn't result in a resolution, please try one of the dispute resolution methods mentioned at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. Please don't insult each other or make personal attacks either. That's not allowed.— Diannaa (talk) 12:32, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Message from 77.232.123.210

• I don't understand why Dianaa delete my edit in the yemen citizens Visa requirements after making all these efforts helping Yemeni fellows! Kindly do not delete anything this is vandalism!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.232.123.210 (talk • contribs)
  • Your additions were removed because the text was copied from copyright documents already published elsewhere online. That's a violation of our copyright policy. Please see your user talk page for more information.— Diannaa (talk) 12:19, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Rev delete (maybe)

Hi, these revisions appear to be copied from this fandom page, the fandom page is CC-BY-SA, although the editor didn't credit the fandom page, and the edit have since been reverted (by me). Is a revision deletion justified here, or is it alright to leave the page as is? (earwig) Justiyaya 13:30, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Since Fandom is compatibly licensed, I don't typically do revision deletion. Removal of unsourced fanpage stuff is always a good idea though.— Diannaa (talk) 13:48, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio Louis-Eugène Cavaignac

Hello Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a moderate probability of potential copyright content in the Louis-Eugène Cavaignac, which appears to have been posted around July 10, 2021. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 14:01, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Listing at WP:CP.— Diannaa (talk) 14:27, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

Note re Doping in China

Systematic doping of Chinese athletes in Olympic Games (and other international sport events) revealed by Xue Yinxian in 2012 and 2017. He has claimed more than 10,000 athletes in China were doped in the systematic Chinese government doping program and they received performance enhancing drugs in the 1980s and 1990s. He stated whole of international medals (Both in the Olympics and other international competitions) that won by Chinese athletes in 1980s and 1990s (1980 to 2000) must be taken back. This is contrary to previous statements by the Chinese government that had denied involvement in systematic doping because they are claiming that athletes doped individually. The International Olympic Committee and World Anti-Doping Agency investigating about these allegations.

Hi. I tried to change the text and words as much as possible to comply with Wikipedia rules. Take another look at the text and help me if you can. This is my first attempt at writing and editing text. So please edit the text for me to find out exactly where the problem is. If have a spelling and grammar problem, correct it. Thanks--CemasoV (talk) 04:58, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

The proposed versions is not okay, because it presents the same ideas in the same order as the source using identical or almost identical wording.

A second problem unrelated to copyright: we don't link common words (systematic, doping, medals, etc) and we don't link years. Terms should only be linked on first occurence.— Diannaa (talk) 11:28, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

References

July 2021 Thermal comfort

Hi, I have received a message from you about my contribution to the Thermal Comfort page. I am new here and I hope I am writing in the correct place. I also apologize in advance for not exactly understanding which sections you are referring to, but I find this system very confusing. However, I just would like to clarify that the great majority of the ASHRAE 55 Standard was written by researchers like me who contribute and edit the body of the Standard. For example, the ankle draft equation is an equation available in the public domain. You can use this link to access the original research paper in which the equation was published. ASHRAE does not own the right to solely use that specific equation. On the other hand, they are using an equation in their standard that is in the public domain. The same is true for most of the equations that are in the ASHRAE and many other Standards. Moreover, I was under the impression that if the original source is correctly cited it is okay to use some material from books or Standard as it is normally done in research papers. I would really appreciate it if you could help me better understand what was wrong. I am happy to share with you the relevant papers with you in which you can find the source code I added to the Thermal Comfort page. Tarta88 (talk) 06:58, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Sorry but our copyright rules do not allow us to copy text from copyright source documents. We don't have an exception for research papers; they enjoy the same protection under copyright law as books or websites or other sources, unless they are specifically released under a compatible license. The article you point to was first published in IndoorAir in December 2016 and is protected by copyright. All the content will be copyright, including formulas.— Diannaa (talk) 14:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, sorry but I believe that your conclusions are incorrect. See, for example, the Elsevier guidelines stating that Authors can share their preprint anywhere at any time. The same, consequently, is true for the article I mentioned in my previous message entitled: Predicted Percentage Dissatisfied with Ankle Draft. The authors, for this reason, they could publish their pre-print manuscript on eScholarhip - Open Access Publications from the University of California. The authors have the right to share those equations publically. Please also read this webpage Elsevier - when permission is not required. They state that material can be freely used when authors released their work into the public domain. Hence, in this specific case, the ankle draft equation can be shown in Wikipedia. Moreover, equations can be used in public documents, articles, or Wikipedia pages even if previously published as long as they are cited appropriately. I am sure that Wikipedia shows the equation E = mc2 despite the fact that this equation was published in a scientific paper. As long as the equation is referenced correctly people should be able to use it somewhere else. It is not that the journal now owns the equations that rule our universe. Diannaa could you please revert the changes you made? Tarta88 (talk) 05:12, 2 August 2021 (UTC) I am also copying one of the authors of the paper in this discussion Stefano

Einstein's 1905 work is certainly in the public domain due to its age. Regarding the paper you copied, the author may have been granted the right to share his/her work, but that does not place the material in the public domain, and does not change its copyright status. Don't confuse "open access" with "public domain"; "open access" only means that we do not have to buy access to the work. So no, I don't believe I am wrong. — Diannaa (talk) 13:00, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

JuH Logo

Hi Diannaa, have a look here... ─ The Aafī ^(talk) 07:39, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that yesterday. I was pinged. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 14:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Quotation restoration

Hello Diannaa, I restored the quotation that you had deleted. This quote directly supports the text and citation. A quote from the source helps readers more quickly verify the text on the page without having to click the link(s). The citation tool has many options, including the ability add a quote. I understand removing or changing a quote that is not related to the cited text, however this quotation was directly supportive.[1] --Ooligan (talk) 21:19, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Adherence to our non-free content rules is more important than speed or convenience. The source is readily available, so the quotation is not needed in my opinion.— Diannaa (talk) 22:30, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

James Hanley (novelist)

Diannaa, an image has been recently added to James Hanley (novelist). This is claimed to be freely available for use because Hanley died in 1947. This is incorrect, because he died in 1985. I did not know how to handle this! Thanks. Rwood128 (talk) 09:38, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

The artist who created the painting is Sydney Earnshaw Greenwood, who died in 1947. The date of the subject of the painting is irrelevant.— Diannaa (talk) 12:23, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Copyright Infringement?

You recently warned me for copyright infringement. Can you please elaborate on this? I edited a page with words, I'm unsure what could possibly be copyrighted. 86.5.160.43 (talk) 19:40, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

The content you added appears to have been copied from https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/christie-affair, which is not compatibly licensed.— Diannaa (talk) 00:30, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Fair enough, I didn't realise that infringed copyright. Thank you for telling me. 86.5.160.43 (talk) 22:47, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

How should a Lead Paragraph portray a Historical Site?

Diannaa, you have worked tirelessly and commendably to "bring-up-to-par" several of the more difficult and conflict-ridden articles here, on Wikipedia. An Administrator recently wrote to me: "Every conflict in the world is a conflict on Wikipedia." And who more than you knows that this makes our work here all the more difficult, considering the range of diverse opinions and, especially, when there are different "ideological forces" at play and neither side is willing to yield. So be it. We can at least mention "the mainstream way of interpreting the lot," as well as mention "the other particular interpretations," so long as we give due weight to the mainstream view. And, in cases where the mainstream view is undecided or divided, we can give equal weight to both. My question to you is what do we do with a historical site such as the City of David. Should the lead paragraph jump right into the conflicting views, or should it, first and foremost, give a general overview of the historical nature/aspect of the site, and only later (in the subsequent sections of the page) treat on the site's different meanings to different folks? Perhaps you have a solution that will be agreeable to us all, for as it is now, some of the editors here are discouraged, as you can see by the exchange here: User talk:Arminden#Your contributions. Thanking you in advance for any help and advice.Davidbena (talk) 00:54, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section calls for the lead section to summarize the content of the article using 4 or 5 paragraphs. I haven't written leads for any places or historical sites, or delved into the world of Israel-Palestine topics, but the same manual of style applies to all articles. Right now the lead doesn't do that, it doesn't even begin to do that. Sorry I don't have the time or expertise to help any further.— Diannaa (talk) 01:06, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

PLMun Article

Hi Diannaa, this is from Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Muntinlupa, regarding the article of our institution posted in Wikipedia is there any way that we can send an accurate details of our institution or process that we can follow to correct the information posted on the page? Thank you.

You should post suggestions on the article talk page. Don't suggest that we allow you to copy text from the school website to Wikipedia; we're not allowed to host copyright content.— Diannaa (talk) 12:53, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

SIEM Page

"Your additions to the above article include passages copied verbatim or nearly verbatim from a non-free source. This was detected by automatic plagiarism detection software. For copyright reasons, your contribution was deleted. Please review the Plagiarism and Copyright training module before proceeding further. Thanks. — Diannaa (talk) 14:01, 29 July 2021 (UTC)"

NIST references are free for public use and distribution. Microsoft functionality such as logging functions to include a number and explanation are core functionality and is a matter of fact free for operational use - any interpretation removes any scientific rigor from the discussion and it is a function of computer science. This is also free for use and distribution from their website. Additionally, Linux and directories and files structures, again, are matter of fact, open source and free for distribution. The software may have picked up syntax that is 1:1 but it has no context to the actual subject or topic. Additionally, you have deleted completely original included in your scan. Please advise Diannaa. Jbuchanan 1 (talk) 14:16, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

I am happy to adjust the article, but do not know what direction to go in considering the nature of what was deleted including several paragraphs original work for computer functionality. Any help would be greatly appreciated Diannaa. Jbuchanan 1 (talk) 16:40, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Jbuchanan 1— Diannaa (talk) 21:36, 29 July 2021 (UTC)

Harvard fixes

Thank you so much for cleaning up all my messes! I am trying to learn how to do Harvard style for multiple references by copying what I have seen elsewhere but clearly there is something I don't understand! I'll get it eventually! Thank you in the meantime, I sincerely appreciate it. Jenhawk777 (talk) 03:07, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Hi Jenhawk777! When copying from one Wikipedia article to another, it's important to bring along a complete book/journal reference to go with your {{sfn}} templates (or other Harvard citation templates such as {{harvnb}}) to make the citation complete. Otherwise the wikilink generated by the sfn template does not point to a book in the bibliography. There's a script available that points out citation errors generated by this omission that highlights the errors in red. Please see User:Ucucha/HarvErrors for the script that I use. If you need any help getting started with scripts, please let me know. Cheers, — Diannaa (talk) 11:39, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Well, when actually copying - not just observing and mimicking - I try to only copy from myself, if then, and since I don't normally use the harvard method, it wouldn't be there for me to directly copy. So I was adding that, and while I know it has to have a bibliography, and I did try to add those - apparently missing some - what I am actually unsure about is the sfn itself. Isn't it the same as the "name = ..." in the citation? You added in dates to fix the ones you fixed and I don't know why. Jenhawk777 (talk) 18:09, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

It is not the same as naming a citation. It's a completely different system.

The source book/document has to be present in the article somewhere (preferably in a "sources" section but it can be elsewhere) and the source book/document has to be enclosed in a template (cite book, cite journal, cite web, etc). The date is mandatory in the sfn template if it is present in the template for the source book/document. (It's also possible to specify a different arrangement using the template {{sfnRef}}.) While some citations had missing dates and were therefore broken, In some articles, I removed the sfnRef specification from some sources and added dates to the sfn templates in order to make the citation style uniform throughout the article.

All authors need to be listed, and everything needs to be spelled correctly and formatted correctly or the sfn template will not create a clickable link down to the sources section. If you are using sfn templates, I recommend you read the how-to guide at Help:Shortened footnotes and it's best if you install the script too, so as to catch you own errors.— Diannaa (talk) 19:38, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Bless you for your patience - and your help. I am still such a newbie in so many ways! I think I am getting the hang of it. I went through all the articles I attempted "sfn" on and tried to make sure of what you said here, and I think I got them all - at least there is no red left anywhere that I can see! I would be happy to install the script too - but I don't know what that is. Sorry - going now to read up on this. I sometimes find WP instructions hard to follow - as if written by programmers who don't quite think in the same way as the rest of us - that's a good thing of course, but sometimes makes it hard to follow them in English. Or maybe I'm just stupid... :-) Anyway, I am working on it and I appreciate your help. Maybe one of these days I will go back to Biblical Criticism and change out all the rps. Thanx again. Jenhawk777 (talk) 20:14, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Yet another request

On July 20, an admin slapped {{copypaste|section}} at the Chandler Thornton article. Since then, no one has removed any infringing material and done the necessary rev/deletes. I found about this only because a new editor was trying to delete the section - and not for copyright reasons. As you know, I'm not good at this, so here I am imposing on you again. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Cleaned. Thank you for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 11:31, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again for fixing. I assume it was okay to remove the template from the article.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:05, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Yes of course – I forgot to do that step. — Diannaa (talk) 12:09, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Administrator changes

BusterD

Kees08 • Nickshanks • Protonk • Schissel • Ultraexactzz • Wknight94

CheckUser changes

TheresNoTime

Oversighter changes

TheresNoTime

ST47

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

• Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

• Following an amendment request, the committee has clarified that the Talk page exception to the 500/30 rule in remedy 5 of the Palestine-Israel articles 4 case does not apply to requested move discussions.

Miscellaneous

• You can vote for candidates in the 2021 Board of Trustees elections from 4 August to 17 August. Four community elected seats are up for election.

---

• Discuss this newsletter
• Subscribe
• Archive

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:18, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Delete

I allows you to delete the file a view of Encounter Marine Park— Preceding unsigned comment added by VNHRISHIKESH (talk • contribs)

The image will be deleted in a few days by an administrator on the Commons.— Diannaa (talk) 14:45, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Take a look at this paid editing?

@Diannaa, Hi, not sure if it's something that you work on, can you take a look at this? Thanks. Tame (talk) 19:14, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

What is it I am supposed to be looking for? I have no experience assessing drafts, if that's what you need. — Diannaa (talk) 19:37, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Henfenfeld Castle Attribution

As you saw in Pfinzing Castle I copied from German Wikipedia and forgot to add attribution. I did the same thing with Henfenfeld Castle too. How can I add attribution to it? SiliconProphet (talk) 19:46, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Step 1: Make a small edit to the article, using an edit summary similar to this. Step 2 (optional): Add a template like this to the article talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 19:52, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Talk Page Oddity

Hey Dianna, I got a post on my talk page about the Princeton, Texas page. Apparently I edited the page, which I had to check the history....it was in 2013. Anyway, the user who contacted me (User:Pinecar) is asking me (and many others) to get involved in a slow-speed revert-war. I'm not sure why they care about this lawsuit and I feel there might be some personal involvement there, because why would they be so keen on getting something from 2011 deleted if they weren't?

Regardless of that, the revert-war is concerning. Even more concerning is the user getting other users involved in it. I think this requires an admin's input, so I am bringing it to you. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 23:57, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi Neutralhomer. Sorry but I don't have the skill set to help deal with this matter.— Diannaa (talk) 13:05, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Roger Wilco. :) - Neutralhomer • Talk • 13:09, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Revdel?

Hiya! I just warned a good-faith user who has copied material directly from a British Museum large-print teaching PDF https://www.britishmuseum.org/sites/default/files/2019-12/Large%20print%20guide_Troy.pdf to the Heinrich Schliemann article. Sorry, forgot the diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Heinrich_Schliemann&diff=prev&oldid=1036742203 All the best, Haploidavey (talk) 12:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

I have done the required revision deletion. Thanks for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 13:08, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Al-Tabligh Verse

hello Diannaa ,Thanks for your tips and tricks,I'm a novice and try to do my edit better,I hope you help me in this

thank you kindly.

Greetings!

Diamond Jubilee of Queen Victoria

Greetings, Diannaa! Is there a way by which you can disclose the text of this revision to me? It will be very helpful as it would allow me to find free-sources for the removed material, and after copy-editing, I can add that to the article. Thanks. Peter Ormond 💬 09:32, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Changing what you use as a source does not make any difference from a copyright point of view. The prose has to be re-written in your own words. I can send you the deleted text via email, but you will have to activate your Wikipedia email first.— Diannaa (talk) 12:02, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! I've activated my email. Please send the text with the inline citations, or you can opt for sending the source of that complete revision. Thanks once again! Peter Ormond 💬 14:16, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Email sent. I see I removed copyright text copied from six different sources.— Diannaa (talk) 14:23, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Repeated close paraphrasing

Hi, I've been noticing this user has been doing lots of close paraphrasing in multiple articles. Almost every one of their edits involves close paraphrasing. In addition, they were warned about it over a year ago here. The main pages I’m seeing this on are on 2019–2021 Sudanese protests, 2019–2021 Lebanese protests, 2019–2021 Iraqi protests, Timeline of the Syrian civil war (2020), and Timeline of the Syrian civil war (2021). Thepharoah17 (talk) 20:57, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

If you could please provide me with some specific diffs where you believe close paraphrasing is an issue, I would be happy to examine them. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 00:13, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Copyright in Superman enemies list

Hello Diannaa, I had no idea that the text came from that site, the information I got from the character came from Wikipedia itself. My edits were in good faith, I got the character information in her own article. This means that someone, before me, must have taken the text from that site and put it in her article. If I had noticed it before, I wouldn't even have put that text on the list. But overall, thanks, I'll pay more attention from now on. HealthKnight1993 (talk) 22:01, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

HealthKnight1993, I have checked, and it looks like we had it first, and the other website copied from Wikipedia. Sorry for the mistake. You can help prevent this kind of mistake on my part by stating in your edit summary where you got the content when you copy from one Wikipedia article to another. In fact it's required by the terms of our license. Please see WP:Copying within Wikipedia for more information on this topic.— Diannaa (talk) 00:22, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Yanceyville and Caswell County edits

Hi Diannaa, thank you so much for your input. I am heeding your advice. If there is any further issue just let me know. I will promptly correct it. Take care :) Peabodyb (talk) 23:53, 5 August 2021 (UTC)

Saint John's Point, County Down

Hi Dianaa, I made a few alterations to Saint John's Point, County Down to stop the copyvio bells ringing but the user has since made new edits. Could you please check for me that it is OK now and strike out some of the edit history? Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 23:34, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Cleaned. Thanks for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 13:02, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

Better sourcing on section on Basal-cell carcinoma

Hi Diannaa, You requested better sourcing regarding the statement of BEC as natural treatment for BCCs. I would like to send you as well the approval of the European Health Authority for BEC / CuradermBCC as safe treatment for basal cell carcinoma on humans. And I have 9 more scientific papers (PDF), but they are not in internet. How can I send them to you?

I hereby attach some scientific studies and clinical trials that are in internet. https://www.curadermbcc.eu/single-blind-controled-clinical-trial-ak/ https://www.curadermbcc.eu/study-solasodine-glycoalkaloids/ https://www.curadermbcc.eu/study-nicotinamide-skin-cancer-prevention/

Looking forward to your response, kind regards.