User talk:Sanskari/Archive 9
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 5 | ← | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | Archive 9 | Archive 10 | Archive 11 | → | Archive 15 |
Copyright checks when performing AfC reviews
Hello Sanskari. This message is part of a mass mailing to people who appear active in reviewing articles for creation submissions. First of all, thank you for taking part in this important work! I'm sorry this message is a form letter – it really was the only way I could think of to covey the issue economically. Of course, this also means that I have not looked to see whether the matter is applicable to you in particular.
The issue is in rather large numbers of copyright violations ("copyvios") making their way through AfC reviews without being detected (even when easy to check, and even when hallmarks of copyvios in the text that should have invited a check, were glaring). A second issue is the correct method of dealing with them when discovered.
If you don't do so already, I'd like to ask for your to help with this problem by taking on the practice of performing a copyvio check as the first step in any AfC review. The most basic method is to simply copy a unique but small portion of text from the draft body and run it through a search engine in quotation marks. Trying this from two different paragraphs is recommended. (If you have any question about whether the text was copied from the draft, rather than the other way around (a "backwards copyvio"), the Wayback Machine is very useful for sussing that out.)
If you do find a copyright violation, please do not decline the draft on that basis. Copyright violations need to be dealt with immediately as they may harm those whose content is being used and expose Wikipedia to potential legal liability. If the draft is substantially a copyvio, and there's no non-infringing version to revert to, please mark the page for speedy deletion right away using {{db-g12|url=URL of source}}. If there is an assertion of permission, please replace the draft article's content with {{subst:copyvio|url=URL of source}}.
Some of the more obvious indicia of a copyvio are use of the first person ("we/our/us..."), phrases like "this site", or apparent artifacts of content written for somewhere else ("top", "go to top", "next page", "click here", use of smartquotes, etc.); inappropriate tone of voice, such as an overly informal tone or a very slanted marketing voice with weasel words; including intellectual property symbols (™,®); and blocks of text being added all at once in a finished form with no misspellings or other errors.
I hope this message finds you well and thanks again you for your efforts in this area. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC).
Sent via--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:20, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Deletion decision re: B. S. Daya Sagar
Hi, Penguin! You have no doubt witnessed the end of the deletion discussion for B. S. Daya Sagar ending with "no consensus." Please see my recent entry on SilkTork's talk page for my latest thoughts on this. I think that the article should have been deleted, and I outline why there. You may find this interesting, and I wanted to tell you that I am considering renominating the article for deletion. That is all. Take care! KDS4444Talk 02:34, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
- @KDS4444: Thanks for reviewing the matter and bringing it here. Your efforts in improving Wikipedia is really appreciable. — CutestPenguinHangout 15:03, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:49, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
08:05:03, 20 November 2014 review of submission by NikkiBlack2014
Good day Cutest Penguin! I rewrote the article MrCap - the artist. I haven't placed the new draft for re-review yet. I found a lot of sub-cites on this artist. I want to make sure I get the format right when I submit the article for review, to avoid any further deletion. I wish for my updates to be successful. Shall I send the article update in this forum first for review and we carry on our dialogue from there, or shall I post it in the article itself and re-submit it. I will be adding completed audio works & additional imagery to the article update,as well. I value your opinion and your guidance. Thank You!
NikkiBlack2014 (talk) 08:05, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
NikkiBlack2014 (talk) 08:05, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
17:58:02, 20 November 2014 review of submission by JWalk6
I need a clarification on how exactly our page written reads like an advertisement. We have simply stated the facts based off of news articles, in similar fashion as other company pages. If you can point out exact areas of improvement, it would be much appreciated. Thank you.
JWalk6 (talk) 17:58, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
JWalk6 (talk) 17:58, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Mark Begich
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mark Begich. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:00, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
RfC United States same-sex marriage map
I opened up an RfC for the U.S. same-sex marriage map due to the complicated situation of Kansas: RfC: How should we color Kansas? Prcc27 (talk) 09:45, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Imran Khan
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Imran Khan. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 48, 2014)
 A beach on the island of San Andrés, a tourist destination in the Caribbean
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Previous selections: Military technology • Everyday life Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:38, 24 November 2014 (UTC) • |
|---|
14:23:36, 24 November 2014 review of submission by JWalk6
in your response, you said "to gift a good, neutral description of the facts, among that area unit the facts that varied interpretations and points of read exist" we believe we have already done this. Please out line specific areas in the article we should improve. Thank you.
JWalk6 (talk) 14:23, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.
Recent changes
- The move from Bugzilla to Phabricator is done. You can now report bugs in Phabricator. [1]
Problems
- There was a problem when editing tables in VisualEditor. VisualEditor was trying to fix bad values for the
colspanorrowspanoption. VisualEditor now leaves the bad values to avoid making things worse. This was fixed on November 17. [2]
Software changes this week
- The new version of MediaWiki (1.25wmf9) has been on test wikis and MediaWiki.org since November 19. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis from November 25, and on all Wikipedias from November 26 (calendar).
- You will be able to try VisualEditor on many new wikis for the first time. After November 26, VisualEditor will become available on Wikidata, Wikiquote, Wikibooks, Wikiversity, Wikivoyage, and Wikinews wikis. You can find it in your Beta options. [3]
- VisualEditor now tells you if your edit needs to be approved. [4]
- You can now use VisualEditor's tools directly when you resume editing after closing the save window. [5]
- VisualEditor's table editing tools now work better in right-to-left languages. [6] [7]
Tech news prepared by tech ambassadors and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.
19:31, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Watergate scandal
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Watergate scandal. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:34, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
The Signpost: 26 November 2014
- Featured content: Orbital Science: Now you're thinking with explosions
- WikiProject report: Back with the military historians
- Traffic report: Big in Japan
- Read this Signpost in full
- Single-page
- Unsubscribe
- MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:22, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Inter-civil war violence in Libya
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Inter-civil war violence in Libya. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:01, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
03:58:25, 29 November 2014 review of submission by Dkoper
Hi Penguin! A bot deleted my question of 3 weeks ago. I've asked for more suggestions on IRC but was told the article looks fine and was suggested to just post the question here again: Could you be more specific about the remaining issues? Which section is not neutral? Also, the current reason for declining the submission is Notability. I read that "Notability guidelines do not apply to content within an article", hence neutrality would be a separate issue to address. How far am I in proving Notability? I believe at least the following references I included satisfy its requirements (reliable, secondary sources, etc.): GCN (2nd source), Apress book (4th source), Bloor (6th source) and IEEE (9th source). Why are these not acceptable and sufficient? Cheers.
Dkoper (talk) 03:58, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
- @Dkoper: The article you are talking about is waiting for review, it is requested that please be patient and meanwhile you can improve the article. — CutestPenguinHangout 07:35, 30 November 2014 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 49, 2014)
 The Mexico–United States border spans six Mexican states and four U.S. states, with a total length of 3,145 km (1,954 mi).
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Previous selections: Tourism in the Caribbean • Military technology Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:36, 1 December 2014 (UTC) • |
|---|
Please comment on Talk:United States
You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:United States. Should you wish to respond, your contribution to this discussion will be appreciated. For tips, please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment § Suggestions for responding. If you wish to change the frequency or topics of these notices, or do not wish to receive them any longer, please adjust your entries at WP:Feedback request service. — Legobot (talk) 00:02, 3 December 2014 (UTC)