User talk:Diannaa/Archive 66

Archive 60

←

Archive 64

Archive 65

Archive 66

Archive 67

Archive 68

→

Archive 70

Estonian language

Hello. Could you check my contribution to Estonian language to see if it meets the guidelines of copyright standards?

Thank you for your feedback --Andcalvin (talk) 14:25, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

I am unable to view the source article, because it is behind a paywall. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:36, 1 September 2019 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio at Loomis Chaffee School

Hello Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Dectector shows a high probability of possible copyright content at Loomis Chaffee School. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 09:34, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

Some of it was recent and had already been removed when I got there, but I removed some more. Thank you for reporting, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:15, 2 September 2019 (UTC)

National University Ostroh Academy

Hello Diannaa! What was wrong with the section "famous people" in "National University Ostroh Academy"? First of all, it was information from different sources, not only from the official website (at least, from biography-article in Wikipedia). Secondly, it is not unique information, it is mostly openly accessed information, thus it didn't violate anyone's rights. It was just information about different famous people. Even more, you can find this information on other Wikipedia articles. Therefore, if you considered that it violated copyrights, why did you delete information with in-Wiki links? Finally, is it possible to recover some of the deleted information? It is valuable work for me. I spend a few hours in searching for the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellring (talk • contribs) 11:44, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello Wellring, there were a couple problems with the "famous people" list. The main reason I removed it is because the descriptions of the people were the same as those found on the school website. It's okay to copy from other Wikipedia articles, but if you do so, it needs to be properly attributed. Please see WP:copying within Wikipedia for details on how to do it. There's a second problem, not related to copyright: each entry needs a citation showing that they did indeed attend the school. Please see WP:ALUMNI for more details on alumni lists. Regarding the removed material, I can send you a copy via email if you like, but you'll have to activate your Wikipedia email first. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:13, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Okay, I understand. Thus, please, send me all the deleted text via email. I've just activated it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Wellring (talk • contribs)

Email sent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:23, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much.

Wintergreen Studios - Editing Clarification

Hi Diannaa,

Thank you for sending me a message on copyrights! I went through the page again and updated the sources as well as removed some text in hopes that it is now acceptable. Was there a specific section that you flagged or was it the whole article? I have been tasked with creating a page on Rena Upitis (referenced in the Wintergreen Studios page) and want to make sure I get it right.

Jpelow (talk) 15:13, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jpelow. The content I removed is visible in this edit. Regardless of the copyright issue, we don't normally include vision statements, mission statements, or corporate goals. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:46, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Understood! Thank you for the quick response and for the clarification. Jpelow (talk) 21:10, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Page: Mass graves in Iran

Hi Diannaa,

I left this reply in my page but didn't receive a response, so re-posting my question here:

The Amnesty International report which I had used as a source is published under the Creative Commons license and I reworded the original text as much as possible without loosing the legal/accountability nature of the text. If Creative Commons license + referencing is not enough, can you advice what type of license the source needs to be published under so that it's adequate for referencing on Wikipedia? Thank you.Effat.assar (talk) 14:30, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Effat.assar and sorry for not noticing your first message. The source document is released the Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Creative Commons licence, which is not a compatible license, as it doesn't allow derivative works or commercial use, and our license does. It's okay to use the document as a source of information, but it's not okay to copy it unaltered or lightly paraphrased. The content will have to be re-written in your own words. There was also content copied from painscapes.com, which is copyright. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:17, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

re: Copyright problem on Alcohol-related crime

[1] This is effectively a list, and lists are not always copyrightable. Perhaps you could consider restoring it after rewriting the first few words, i.e. the introduction to the list? Or I guess we can add quotation marks... --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:32, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

It's not just the first few words that are the issue; the whole paragraph is identical to the source document so you will have to re-word it or present it as an attributed quotation. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:47, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

WP attribution on outside sources

If another entity uses WP material, aren't they supposed to give WP attribution? And if they don't, are we supposed to report it someplace? The reason I ask is that during NPP, I came across 4 articles about Danish bank notes. 3 of the 4 appeared to have been copied from www.worldbanknotescoins.com. When I did my carbon dating, I got a date back in 2015, so I did my copyvio remove and revdel request. However, it appears that the editor was splitting the material from the much longer list article, but didn't give attribution in his edit summary (I've left them a note about that). The prose in question was written in 2007, which definitely predates the outside source. I've reverted the copyvio removal and revdel request, and put attribution in the history. So back to my question, is there someplace I should report this to so that worldbanknotescoins can be contacted and asked to provide attribution? Onel5969 ^{TT me} 11:22, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

According to the terms of our license, they are required to provide attribution, but most websites that copy us don't do so. You could consider contacting the organization and asking them to attribute us (there is no central place that would contact them for you), but I wouldn't bother, as it would be unlikely to get results and is probably not a productive use of your time. You could though consider adding a {{backwards copy}} template to any affected articles. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk)

Send me my edits, please

Hi,

You erased my edits to Raymond Gosling in a way that makes it impossible to do the rewrite you requested. The edits I made are no longer available, and your erasure also erased all the changes that did not include copyrighted material, as well as the added citations.

Obviously the correct solution is that I should have saved copies of all my edits to my hard drive, since apparently sometimes material gets erased in a way that makes it irrecoverable. Since I didn't do that, however, could you send me a copy of the material that you irrecoverably deleted? Skepticalgiraffe (talk) 14:43, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

I can do that, but you will have to activate your Wikipedia email first. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:09, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

I hadn't realize that the email needed to be validated. OK, it should work now. Skepticalgiraffe (talk) 00:57, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Email sent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:06, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, but that seems to be only a fragment of the deleted text. Could you send the rest of the deleted text as well? The history states that what was deletes is:

21:49, 4 September 2019‎ Skepticalgiraffe talk contribs‎ 10,244 bytes +165‎ added a link to oral history.

20:47, 4 September 2019‎ Skepticalgiraffe talk contribs‎ 10,079 bytes +1,665‎ added subheadings; added more on later life with citations to Attar Skepticalgiraffe (talk) 16:09, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

I only removed 981 bytes of the 1830 bytes you added. Here is a diff that shows the content I did not remove. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:20, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Justices of Peace

Would you relook at my edits to the North Carolina section of the Justices of Peace article. I paraphrased the NCPedia article and wrote it in my own words. I didn't think this would be a copyright issue. I can also reference the North Carolina Constitution and Acts of the Assembly if that will help with the content. 19:36, 6 September 2019 (UTC) User:G._Moore talk

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. As you can see the overlap is extensive, and I had to remove it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:45, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyvio or just plain bad article

Hello Dianaa. I'm sorry to bother you but I stumbled over Jesús Mari Lazkano and now wish I had not. I am sure he's a fine fine painter but our article on him is so bad that it makes me want to run out in the street and scream. Quite apart from my many other worries about it, I feared that some of the more purple descriptive passages, which plumb the very depths of encyclopaedia-unsuitability, read like copyvios from, I don't know, his website or his catalogue or something. In translation, I assume, too, just to add to the complexity. Now, I hate to drop this on you ... but I should not be here at all as I am trying to give myself a break from this lovely place and in any case it is above my pay grade and I am not clever enough. So if you feel like having a quick look then great, thank you, and if you do not, please feel free to tell me to bog off and I will peacefully do so. Thanks and all good wishes, 82.39.96.55 (talk) 20:38, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Most of it is from here ; I will fix it up. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:51, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I looked at it and asked myself are you a man or a mouse? and it turns out that I am a mouse! Very grateful for your help. Cheers 82.39.96.55 (talk) 20:58, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey, at least you know who to turn to — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:06, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

<g> 82.39.96.55 (talk) 21:08, 7 September 2019 (UTC)

While I am here ... I just wanted to thank you very much for the helpful, professional and courteous attitude. When editing from an IP I have sometimes seen another side of some of my Wikipedia editor idols, and it turns out that a minority of them have feet-of-clay moments when it comes to dealing with those with less clout – people whom I have thought of as collegiate and engaged and helpful have, in a couple of cases, been rude and dismissive when the only difference in the transaction is that I have been on some IP address and not logged in to my account. It was a sobering and upsetting revelation and made me think very carefully about my own practice and attitudes. (Maybe we should have a compulsory training unit where we have to edit for a week while logged out ... OK silly idea but you know what I mean.) I am sure there is an essay somewhere that makes this point, if not actually someone's PhD thesis! Anyway, I wanted to thank you for so consistently treating people right, whether they are a name or just a bunch of numbers. Thank you, really and seriously. Best wishes 82.39.96.55 (talk) 09:25, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. I do indeed know what you mean about respect: I have noticed being treated a lot less politely when I am using my wee sock account (1,945 edits). Some folks have also suggested editing for a while from a red-linked account as an experiment in getting treated like dirt. There's a flip side to this problem as well: If everybody is going to treat everything I say as the absolute truth and seldom check my work, the pressure is really on to do things perfectly nearly 100% of the time. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:52, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you and gosh I had not even thought of that last point! What a very, very complex place this is sometimes. I remember reading an absolutely brilliant book about online communities long ago – probably mid-1980s at the latest so as you know a lot has changed, at least on the technical side. Nevertheless, I am struck by how much of what I read about behaviours and personality types then seems still to be relevant now. Or maybe it always was, even before it was facilitated by electronics, and someone could have written the same thing about the Garrick Club in 1856? I wish I could remember the book but it's probably been out of print for ... some time! Cheers 82.39.96.55 (talk) 13:55, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Texas A&M University Corps of Cadets Hall of Honor

Howdy Diannaa,

New here, still getting the hang of things. I didn't think citing exact eligibility and criteria requirements with quotations and source was violating copyright, but happy to re-phrase if that's how Wiki likes things. An analog of my contribution would be: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States#Selection_process

The intro regarding the history and # of inductees was original content. Is it standard policy to delete everything without warning or clarification? I spent over 2 hours on that effort — disheartening welcome to this community. Appreciate your guidance. Opereetveritate 7 Sept 2019 —Preceding undated comment added 00:06, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry Opereetveritate but it's simply not practical to discuss each copyright violation on the article talk page. It took me somewhere around eight hours today to clear the daily copyvio reports, and leaving a message first would double or triple that workload. Not physically possible. And by the end of the week I would have hundreds of unresolved cases to clear up. Clear-cut violations I immediately remove, as is permitted by the policy. Short quotations are ok, when there's no alternative. But for the most part everything you add here should be written in your own words please. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:20, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Understood..I'll give it another shot. Am I able to view the previous submission, or is that research gone? (talk) 00:48, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

I've sent the removed material to you via email. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:02, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Awesome, thank youOpereetveritate (talk) 01:06, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Marie Schmolka

Hi Diannaa, I was asked by the historian Anna Hajkova to start the English version of the article dedicated to Marie Schmolka so Anna could further extend and polish the article and that's what she actually started doing. As Anna's work is the major source of information about Schmolka, naturally, there will be similarities between the article and other on-line sources also written by Anna. For example, she is the author of this website: ttps://marieschmolka.org/about-marie-schmolka/ Right now I am quite busy and cannot do the writing/editing myself, but I would be very grateful if you could just take into consideration the circumstances. --Zita Adamova (talk) 11:16, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry Zita Adamova, we are not allowed to host copyright content, not even temporarily for editing, not even in drafts or sandboxes. May I suggest you work on the draft offline and not re-add the material until it meets our copyright requirements? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Decentralized Identifiers

Hello @Diannaa:, Thanks for your time in reviewing Draft:Decentralized Identifiers. As I understand Liz deleted the article on your advice, because of copyright concerns. It was stated that I used text from europa.eu. But I used text from the same source as europa.eu did, namely from w3c. W3c grants reuse by stating "Permission to copy, and distribute the contents of this document, or the W3C document from which this statement is linked, in any medium for any purpose and without fee or royalty is hereby granted". The other concern was that I used text from tudelft.nl. But I used text from the ebook "The Legal Aspects of Blockchain". I provided a link where you could request your own copy, but for your convenience, you can temporarily see the ebook here. As you can see on page 3 the ebook is under a Creative Commons license. Could you please undelete or advise to undelete the article? --FlippyFlink (talk) 21:16, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi FlippyFlink. The webpage https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-spec/ is marked as "Copyright © 2019 the Contributors..." and does not appear to be linked to the license page. A link is a prerequisite for the material to be released under that license. Also relevant is the fact that the license does not allow derivative works, and our license does, which means it is not a compatible license. "The Legal Aspects of Blockchain" appears to be compatibly licensed but some parts are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO and other parts under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International. Neither of these licenses is mentioned in your draft, and it needs to be if you copied from there, in order to provide the legally required attribution. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:22, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Just want to note that I had already removed the content that overlapped with https://w3c-ccg.github.io/did-spec/ before I found content that matched ec.europa.eu. Also, http://pure.tudelft.nl/ws/files/41225519/article.pdf is dated 2017 and "The Legal Aspects of Blockchain" was published after that date, because it mentions events that happened in 2018. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:36, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

Editor at Johnny Reb who won't respect Reliable Sources policy

Hi Diannaa, I'm having trouble with an editor who doesn't seem to understand what reliable sources and original research are, even though I've included links to the relevant policies in the summaries of my reverts. I think he's gone over the line with this edit summary]. Looks like a revdel case to me. Carlstak (talk) 03:58, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry but I don't think that rises to the level where revision deletion is called for. Please email the oversight team if you would like to get another opinion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:09, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa. I would have said "sinks to the level".;-) Carlstak (talk) 14:43, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Ok point taken. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:50, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Strange but True (film)

Hi Diannaa, could you give a look at the premise section in the article Strange but True (film)? The premise is copied from a website. It's quoted and even inside quotation marks, but it's still copyvio, right?--SirEdimon (talk) 04:49, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Doesn't the attribution have to be in the text itself and not just in the footnote?Eschoryii (talk) 06:46, 9 September 2019 (UTC) I will read your response here. Thanks in advance.Eschoryii (talk) 06:55, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

A quotation is not a copyright violation. But it's not best practices either. There's no reason why original prose could not be written. So what I normally do is remove, with an edit summary "remove quotation; no reason why original prose could not be prepared". — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:12, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

My first Article

Dear Dianaa,

thanks for your comment on my first article on a shipping company in Hamburg called "Peter Döhle Schiffahrts-KG". I have duly reviewed your comments and I am positive that all should be fine concerning any copyright issues, citation style as well as information content. Thus, unfortunately I don't understand your remark resp. why the article might still not be ready to be published yet. I would be more than happy if you explained it to me.

Thanks very much in advance!

Best regards BulbousBow56 — Preceding unsigned comment added by BulbousBow56 (talk • contribs) 11:42, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

It wasn't me who left that note, but here's why: Quotations or paraphrased content from the company's own website does not improve the chances of the draft being accepted, as it does nothing to establish notability, which is a very common reason for drafts being declined and articles being deleted. Please refer to Wikipedia:Your first article, which contains lots of advice on how to create articles for this encyclopedia. There's a guide to notability for corporations at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). You might consider visiting the Teahouse for further advice. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:15, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Dhunge Dhara copyright

Hi Diannaa, thanks for your warning. I must admit I got a little carried away with my writing... There are some other paragraphs that need reviewing, but I'll get there as soon as I can. --Judithcomm (talk) 20:53, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi again. The article is now nearly finished, although there is still a LOT or room for improvement. I would appreciate it if you would take a look, especially the section 'Tantric process'. This is an important feature according to experts, but so far I haven't been able to find a source that explains is in a way I can understand, so it's not possible to use my own words. I solved it by quoting one of the referenced reports rather extensively. Do you think it is ok copywritewise this way? Thanks for your time. --Judithcomm (talk) 11:46, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

I've checked the article and found and repaired a couple of issues. The quotations you used in the 'Tantric process' section are ok. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:49, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! --Judithcomm (talk) 13:21, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio at Darien, Connecticut

Hi Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of copyright content at Darien, Connecticut. Regards Woodlot (talk) 13:57, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Well that was a big mess. Thanks for the report! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:50, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyvio text at Bell I. Wiley

Hi, Diannaa, I've just removed a good bit of text copied-and-pasted from Rank and file : Civil War essays in honor of Bell Irvin Wiley. Earwig's copyvio detector doesn't show this, but if you Google phrases from the text I've removed, you can see where it came from. Carlstak (talk) 16:59, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

I can't see it; perhaps we are located in different countries. Google is funny that way — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:14, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Music of Pakeezah

Hi Diannaa, if I add my own interpretation of these lyrics, will that be correct? Will I face any copyright issues from the makers of the film (considering the fact that they must be holding licence of these songs? Vrishchik (talk) 02:04, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Don't do a line-by-line interpretation or translation. A one- or two-sentence summary in your own words as to what each song is about would be appropriate. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:24, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio at D'Arcy Concession

Hi Diannaa, according to Earwig's Copyvio Detector, there is a high probability of copyright content in the D'Arcy Concession article. Regards, Woodlot (talk) 13:48, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

It's a quotation. A quotation of PD material — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:54, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		Many thanks for your expertise in copyright policies and tireless efforts in addressing copyright concerns. Woodlot (talk) 14:29, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:50, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Spider-Man (1994 TV Series)

Why can't I put Wikia content on Wikipedia? It helps a lot. It has a lot of information. Please. Answer me. Thanks. Gabriel Santos 2001 (talk) 16:20, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello Gabriel Santos 2001. The two websites have different purposes. One is a fansite - the other (this one) is an encyclopedia. We're not interested in hosting material that is not sourced to independent reliable secondary sources, such as newspapers, magazines, reliable websites, and books. Wikia is fan-generated content, mostly without any verifiable sourcing whatsoever. That's why you should not add it to Wikipedia. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:36, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City copyvio

Hi! Reaching out because I see you handle copyvio issues. I've proposed a temp article for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City. I've also proposed a more thorough article rewrite as the next item on the talk page. This article has been blanked for over a month now, so trying to figure out how to escalate. Thanks for any help you can offer! Mary Gaulke (talk) 20:32, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

 Done Sorry for the delay. There are very few people working WP:CP right now. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:08, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

9/11

For the complete list, see User:Diannaa/Soundtrack

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xXBNlApwh0c

Spears won Emmy Awards in 2002!

britney won emmy awards in 2002 and why do you deleted that and i also already put the sources. - Johhnyfrankie13 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johhnyfrankie13 (talk • contribs) 01:53, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Someone else removed it, not me. And they gave reasons in the edit summaries too: See the page history. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:10, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyright

Hello! I know very little about copyright issues and how to deal with them. I happened to come across one while searching for vandalism in the recent changes list. Would you be so kind to take a look at User_talk:Progressingamerica#Close_paraphrasing_on_The_1619_Project? I would not be surprised if this is the tip of the iceberg. Poveglia (talk) 04:39, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

You mentioned copyright violations on Joseph A. Spadaro's talkpage on the Testosterone undecanoate article. Unfortunately not all of it has been removed yet. For example this edit is a copypaste from here. Poveglia (talk) 05:26, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

He removed my message but not the copyright violations. [2] Poveglia (talk) 05:36, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

The more I dig the more I find [3] Poveglia (talk) 05:46, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Publications of the US Government are public domain. If you find cases like this edit you can repair them yourself by adding the {{PD-notice}} template. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:15, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Good point, I don't have to follow their laws so I don't know much about them. Thank you; I'll add the template. I believe the other examples are not from the US government. Poveglia (talk) 15:12, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

That template's documentation says: "should be placed at the end of a citation" but the example puts it at the front! I cannot edit that page. Poveglia (talk) 15:21, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

I already added the template at Testosterone_undecanoate so don't worry about that step. I know how to fix the template documentation, so I will fix that too. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:45, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Bruce Olson

I understand WP policies. I understand copyrighting and plagiarism. I can also read, and the source which you are claiming I have copy-pasted into this article does not, even in one phrase, exist in this article. What does this have to do with you hiding the recent edit history? Your claim and corresponding action do not match up and this is even more confusing because the article is publicly unchanged. Why did you do any of that? Thank you.Luke Kindred (talk) 13:53, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate report link. Some of the content you added was copied from old versions of the same article, and did not have to be removed. The part I did remove is the final segment shown in purple in the iThenticate report ("Though Olson had no official sponsorship..."). — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:13, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

N-Acylethanolamine

Hi Diannaa, and thank you very much for telling and helping me about this problem. Is it possible for you to explain me how to add this attribution for an eventual particular instance, as you did with a button (CC) followed by the text "Material was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License". Ok, I can imagine, that I have to make an external link at the text and to "Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License", but how do You/I make the CC button in front of the text, as You did. Thank you in advance and please have a further nice day — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.107.107.32 (talk) 19:14, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

It's an image file! The mark-up is as follows: [[File:CC-BY icon.svg|50px]] Material was copied from this source, which is available under a [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License]. Alternatively, you can use the template {{CC-notice}} — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:16, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, and again, thank you very much. Just two last questions, if you please. Where to see if material from a webpage is available under a compatible Creative Commons Licence, so I can give attributions, so readers are made aware that I copied some or parts of the prose, rather than wrote it myself. And how much of a prose is needed for the rule to go in to action, as it is difficult to give reliable and correct information, if some of the words-phrases, or the exact same elements from documentations is left out. But anyway, thank You, and have a very nice weekend, hopefully by healthy NAE producing singing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.107.107.32 (talk) 18:35, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

a favor

I'm not sure if I can ask this favor. I would like to use a world bank source, which in it's third page, claims information is CC By 3.00 IGO. Can I use the information, graphics and maps created in the document? Thank you for advance. The source is "the toll of war": [4] --BlueMadrigal (talk) 23:39, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

That document is compatibly licensed. It's okay to use as long as proper attribution is given. See the section immediately above for a couple of ways to provide attribution for the prose. For any images, upload them to the Commons, and use {{cc-by-3.0-igo}} — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:57, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. If I get correct, it should be {{CC-notice|cc=by3|url=https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/bitstream/handle/10986/27541/The%20Toll%20of%20War.pdf|author(s)=Staff of World Bank Group}}. I tried to upload one graphic and used the template at the description. The file is "Syrian civil war number of estimated damaged units.svg" ALSO is there a limit in number of citations (total pages that can be used) per article? Fair use had such a limit. --BlueMadrigal (talk) 00:24, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

That doesn't work so well, because the page does not use the generic CC-by license. It's actually the Attribution 3.0 IGO (CC by 3.0 IGO) license. Better to do this: [[File:CC-BY icon.svg|50px]] Material was copied from this source, which is available under a [https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/igo/ Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 IGO license]. I don't understand your second question; please re-word it — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:17, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

I tried to summarize the destruction on housing, and health care. While summarizing the decline in the economy using the source ([5]), (16:38, 13 September 2019 EranBot talk contribs marked revision 915499314 on Return of refugees of the Syrian Civil War as a potential copyright violation Tag: PageTriage). I may still be doing something wrong. Did I use more than permitted amount (number) of citations from a single source? That was the question I tried to ask before (How much of content from one source, we can use (number of citations)). --BlueMadrigal (talk) 17:49, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

You can add (or even copy) as much content as you like from a source if it is compatibly licensed and if you properly provide attribution. Eranbot will still pick up on the copying, because it is only a bot, but that doesn't mean you did something wrong (it's what we call a "false positive"). I have marked the case as "no action required". I hope this answers your question. If not, please feel free to ask again! :) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:26, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Hi Dianna Thank you for your note on my attempt to remedy the absence of any reference to Eastbourne's Bronze Age settlement. As you correctly pointed out, I had copied and pasted from the Historic England website (an official public information quango) which I now fully understand is not the way to proceed. I do however want to get some of this info up on the page so I guess I've got a learning journey ahead about how to include it without infringing copywrite. Fundamentally, I'm going to need to use that source as it is a recondite topic and I am not a professional archaeologist! Best regards Dan (user: Cadre2002) Cadre2002 (talk) 16:36, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyvio concerns on newly created page

Hello Diannaa,

I recently created a page after a split discussion, visible here and I checked the new pages feed, and it says that it is a possible copyright violation. However, the only page it lists is a html mirror of wikipedia, that shows an old revision of the page I split from. Though the page hasn't been reviewed yet, what should I do in this situation? Thank you. SuperWikiLover223 (talk) 19:27, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

The bot is showing a false positive, because the content has been copied to a Wikipedia mirror. So it's not a copyright violation. However, when copying or moving content from one Wikipedia article to another, you need to provide attribution. This is done by saying in your edit summary where you got the content: like this. If the amount of material moved/copied is large, it's a good idea to also add attribution templates to the talk pages of both articles. Like this: Diff of Talk:Machiavellianism scale; Diff of Talk:Machiavellianism. Full details and procedure at WP:copying within Wikipedia. I have marked the bot report as "Fixed" as you are now aware of our attribution requirements — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:39, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for helping me with this, I greatly appreciate it! :)SuperWikiLover223 (talk) 22:19, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyright infringement

Thanks for your advice. I have resubmitted my entry on the Doctrine of Discovery without reference to material other than the materials available through elca.org.

URL98902 (talk) 20:52, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyright infringement: Magdalen Chapel, Edinburgh

I've just received your copyright infringement notice for Magdalen Chapel, Edinburgh. Can I ask for further guidance?

Since the website in question appears to be the best online source about the building, it's going to be difficult not to follow it for the history section. I can see there are some elements that I've not properly rewritten. Can't we just delete these and keep the sections which don't cause problems?

e.g. The site in question: "The Chapel was built between 1541 and 1544 by Janet Rynd, widow of Michael MacQueen (died 1537), who had left money for this purpose." My line: "The chapel was built between 1541 and 1544 using money bequeathed by Michael MacQueen (died 1537), supplemented by Janet Rhynd, his widow."

I checked another two sites and got the alternative spelling of his widow's name, so I used that. I also found she supplemented her husband's money, so I rephrased it. I'm not sure how else to 'de-copyright' what seems like basic facts about the building.

You've also deleted the section on design elements, which was largely found on another site. Was there a problem with this too?Peaky76 (talk) 22:14, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Peaky76. Please have a look at the Copyvio Detector report to view the overlap with the webpage. You can use this tool when preparing your re-write, which should be created at the temporary page using the instructions on your talk page. It's not necessary to change the spelling of people's names to avoid copyright issues (that's not where the problem lies), and it's not necessary to re-work sections that have no issues. You are on the right track with your example proposed amendment. The design section shows a lot of overlap with this website: see the Copyvio Detector as well as with scottishreformationsociety.org. So no, the design section is not ok. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:56, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

That was just an illustration of what I'd done with a sentence that wasn't an issue. My question is about the rest. For instance, that tool highlights several passages that can't reasonably be changed, e.g.

The Foundation Charter of 1547 says 'that when the said Michael was greatly troubled with an heavy Disease, and oppressed with Age, yet mindful of Eternal Life, he esteemed it ane good Way to obtain Eternal Life, to erect some Christian Work, for ever to remain and endure.'

This is a direct quote from a historic document. Also:

An inscription over the door reads 'He that hath pity upon the poore lendeth unto the Lord and the Lord will recompence him that which he hath given, Pro. XIX vers XVII.

This is a direct quote of an inscription in the building. This is not copyrighted.

And I've redone the page on the temp page indicated but it is still highlighting factual statements like, "The tower and spire were added about 1620" and "The chapel was built between 1541 and 1544" and "It is the headquarters of the Scottish Reformation Society". These are factual statements. How are these to be changed? And what do I do about quotes? Peaky76 (talk) 09:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Short quotations are ok to use. The bot (being just a bot) will continue to highlight them, but they don't need to be altered. Simple statements like "The tower and spire were added about 1620" don't need to be altered. That being said, Earwig's tool shows there's still a ways to go: report, report. Please let me know when your temp page is ready and I will check it over. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 10:30, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Hi Diannaa I live in a very small area of Eastbourne called Ocklynge. An interesting fact about this area is that the land was owned in the early modern period by the Knights of St John. The owner of Ocklynge Manor (presently run as a B and B) has been to the relevant library in London and copied the entry to her website. Am I allowed to put the direct quote from the 14th century records onto Wikipedia? The problem - if I am not - is this research - expensive, onerous and impractical for me to undertake - will not see the light of Wikipedia day. "There is at Okelyng one messuage which is worth yearly 12d. And there are 52 acres of land, value per acre 12d., and they are worth 52s. Also there are 3 acres of meadow, value per acre 18d., and they are worth 4s. 6d. Also pasture there is common for 200 sheep, which is worth yearly 16s 8d. And please and perquisities of courts worth 6. 8d." Documents detailing the history of Ocklynge Manor, can be found at the Museum of the Order of St. John, St. John’s Gate, Clerkenwell, London, EC1M 4DA http://www.ocklyngemanor.co.uk/history_19.html Cadre2002 (talk) 21:32, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Talk page access

Hi Diannaa, I was wondering if you would want to modify talk page access for this user you recently blocked because of recent personal attacks. —Aranya (talk) 02:11, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Seems to have stopped. Thanks for removing; that was the right thing to do. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:41, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Zaha Hadid

Hi, I have reversed two sentences copied and pasted from https://www.vitra.com/en-gb/campus/architecture/architecture-fire-station to Zaha Hadid and warned the editor. Is there a rule of thumb for when a copyvio is too small for revision deletion to be worth while? TSventon (talk) 13:18, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

The policy does not mention a minimum size. I have gone ahead with it. Thank you for your interest in copyright clean-up. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:23, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I am not looking for copyvios, but sometimes I stumble upon them. TSventon (talk) 14:15, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Shared socioeconomic pathways

Hi @Diannaa: I was reviewing this article. Shared socioeconomic pathways. [6] scope_creep^Talk 17:10, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

I don't see how we can save it. I have nominated it for G12 deletion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:10, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Chess Team

"non-free images are not allowed in galleries"

Why is that can you link to the rules regarding this as this appears to be allowed but also not allowed? Can you explain how I am able to present the book cover art in this low-resolution reference format. If not a gallery is there some other mechanism? Is the only course of action to literally create a page for every book? Al Maddern (talk) 20:39, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

The relevant rule is Wikipedia:Non-free content. It states there (follow the shortcut WP:NFG) that as a general rule non-free images are not allowed in galleries. Typically for books, we have one non-free image, even if the article is about a book series. The policy page is Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria. Please note that there are 10 criteria that non-free content must meet in order for it to be included. All 10 criteria must be met. The ones that are not met by an image gallery of book covers are #3a (minimum number of images) and #8 (contextual significance). #8 means that our understanding of the topic must be increased by the inclusion of the image. It must tell us something that cannot be described using words alone. Including these images only tells us the book exists, and that can indeed be covered via words alone. You can consider writing an article about each book, but before you do, please ensure you've got enough sources to do so: each book must have at least two instances where it is extensively discussed in a reliable source. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:41, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

"removed obvious copyright book descriptions"

According to the author, a novelist with over 60 published titles, the precise information on these books it is common to reproduce these descriptibe texts for the purpose of describing the context of the novels. It is done repeatedly across the internet without issue, from Amazon to GoodReads to Fan Wiki pages. So why are these precise texts not allowed as clearly quoted and cited contexts within Wikipedia?

What would have been helpful is a warning that this information is not allowed, what is allowed instead and some time to rectify the issue without it simply being removed. I am in the process of constructing the curated description of each of the novels in the series but as there over twenty it is taking some time to accomplish Al Maddern (talk) 20:39, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

The relevant rule is Wikipedia:Non-free content#Text. Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself and far stricter than most other websites, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. Please note the rule states that "Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited". The solution is to prepare your own plot summaries using your own words. There's no deadline; add them as you are able. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:49, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

General

On a general note, as someone who is relatively new to creating pages on Wikipedia it is entirely demoralising to have constructed these pages and then to be dragged through this vast amount of bureaucracy and administrivia. The information behind what is and is not allowed seems to be buried behind a hundred sub pages and confusing often contradictory statements which taken at first glance would appear to mean that very little is allowed. While I appreciate the curation work that some users clearly undertake on behalf of the community and how draining it must be to have to constantly find the same issues, this is possibly because the information is not obvious or easily accessible.Al Maddern (talk) 20:39, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

You are correct - very little non-free content is allowed. That's because Wikipedia strives to be free content that can be copied and distributed and re-distributed. It's in our foundational pillars:

3. Wikipedia is free content that anyone can use, edit, and distribute: Since all editors freely license their work to the public, no editor owns an article and any contributions can and will be mercilessly edited and redistributed. Respect copyright laws, and never plagiarize from any sources. Borrowing non-free media is sometimes allowed as fair use, but strive to find free alternatives first.

I suggest that if you're planning on becoming a regular contributor that you have a look at the basics to start: you might consider working through some of the lessons at Help:Contents under "edit an article". The main tutorial is located at Wikipedia:Tutorial. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:00, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

removal of information from ILGA's State-Sponsored Homophobia Report

Death penalty for homosexuality

Hello Diannaa. I hope you are well. I just received a notification informing me that I had added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. On page 2 of the report you will find the Copyright license stating that it is provided free as long as the author and the organization are cited, which I did. I would be really grateful if you could clarify how I violated copyright in this case given that I have complied with what is requested by the author. Kind regards! Lrm1983 (talk) 03:02, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello Lrm1983. I did see that notice, but it says "It is provided free for your use", which is not the same thing as releasing it to the public domain. Free for what kind of uses? Is it ok for commercial use? Are derivative works allowed? in other words, the license does not appear to me to be liberal enough to be compatible with our license. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:17, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Request regarding MARCOS

I have recently finished polishing the article MARCOS. In the process I found a few major copyright violations, which I corrected. Due to paucity of time, I humbly admit that I can’t scan the whole article for copyright violations. Therefore, I am requesting you to take a look at this.—VaibhavafroTalk 04:37, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

I've done some more clean-up. Thank you for reporting. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:45, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Page: Ahasanul Islam Titu

Hi Diannaa,

I have updated the Associations page for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahasanul_Islam_Titu. Please let me know if there are any copyright violations that must be addressed as it was deleted last time I updated it - Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali.Sails (talk • contribs) 06:59, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

The new version is okay from a copyright point of view. Thanks for taking the time to do that. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:17, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

RD1 needed

Hi,

This appears to be a copyright violation of https://www.buyanyinsurance.com/about-us and https://www.middleeastdirectory.com/news-detail/32535/buyanyinsurance-com-introduces-an-intelligent-insurance-chatbot-in-the-uae. Saw it on the 'Potential copyright violation log' which I don't think I've seen before.... Adam9007 (talk) 13:47, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Adam9007. This has been an active thing since October 2018. Drafts and certain articles that are potential copyright violations are now tagged by EranBot. The tags are added to the corresponding listings in the New Pages Feed, so that patrollers will know to have a close look at the possibility of copyright violations on those pages. The items are also listed at https://tools.wmflabs.org/copypatrol/en, which is the list that I patrol. I've done the needed revision deletion for this case. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:07, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

York House School

Sorry, you left us a message about copyright, but I have no idea what is wrong with our page. I am the Communications Manager at York House School. Also, I have no idea how to use Talk pages. Can you be more specific as to what is wrong with our page? All the information is from our website (York House School). — Preceding unsigned comment added by York House School (talk • contribs) 20:25, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

You cannot post copyright material copied from the school website to Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

A second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page.

There's a third problem: your username. You can't edit under the username "York House School"; if you are planning to edit Wikipedia you will have to choose another username. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

This article demands your attention

The article S5-class submarine has been created recently. It was created many times before but was deleted for reasons unknown to me. I have explained on the talk page of the article about why some sources used in the article are highly credible. Please save the article from deletion for the same reason. I am asking you since you work on military projects.—VaibhavafroTalk 07:51, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Favor

Diannaa, I have to run--first, I have to pee, second, I got a puppy at home that probably needs to pee. Can you do me a solid and revdelete a copyvio that starts here? Thank you so much! Drmies (talk) 18:01, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Done. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:07, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I really appreciate it. Puppy was fine, BTW. Drmies (talk) 23:02, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Like — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:14, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Jentsch

Regarding your deletions of text from Adolph Jentsch for copyright reasons, the text was taken in part from the book by Olga Levinson, correct, but that book is long out of print and out of copyright. The copyright was 1973 to the author, Olga Levinson, who died in 1989. I knew her personally. Ratel (talk) 23:31, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Other text was taken from a book by Esme Berman, and a reference to her book was included in the References section. Links from the relevant text to that source were my next step. Please reinstate all the edits so I can continue my work there. Ratel (talk) 23:35, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

You may wish to look at the applicable copyright law at Copyright law of South Africa. It's pretty liberal in its interpretations, but even so I am not averse to further footnoting for attribution as well as rephrasing to avoid copyright issues altogether. The page is a work in progress. I would appreciate you reinstating the deleted text, or if that is impossible, email me the deletions so I can rework and attribute them before re-insertion. Thanks. A discussion before deletion would have been appreciated. Ratel (talk) 23:59, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

According to the 1978 law, the book would enjoy copyright protection for 50 years after the author's death (i.e. until the end of 2035). However the earlier 1965 law would apply to a book published in 1973. As far as I can tell from this article, the term of copyright for books did not change under the 1978 law (meaning, the copyright law in effect in 1973 gave literary works copyright protection until 50 years after the death of the author [i.e. until the end of 2035]). Esmé Berman died in 2017. I have sent the removed text to you via email. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Poison (web series)

Hey, see copyvio report. I've read Themoviedb's TOU, it's licensed under non-commercial use. I'm unable to add {{Copypaste}} because themoviedb is on spam blacklist. Can you please clean and revdel? Thanks! -- CptViraj (📧) 11:37, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

All done. Thank you for reporting. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:34, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

A thankless job

Thank you for supporting me on WP:ANI. You are in a slim minority, even among administrators. You know, I spend most of my time deleting stuff that shouldn't be here, including vandalism, unsourced stuff, BLP violations, and a good bit of copyright violations. I expect noobs to come at me constantly, and sometimes they do. But I never bargained for the type of outrage I began this week: experienced content contributors and at least two veteran administrators accuse me of vandalism, rail against standard operating procedure, and apparently do not understand the basic situation as we found it. Yes, it's a shame the COPYVIO tags are big and ugly. Yes, it's a shame I had to hack out content from five (out of over two dozen infringing articles) Yes, perhaps I am over-the-top in aggressiveness and being willfully offended here. But whatever. I just do this in my spare time for no good reason. I have lots of better things to do around the house. Perhaps it's time for another extended wikibreak. Elizium23 (talk) 21:07, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. I still have 20 more of yesterday's copyvio reports to clear or I would frame a longer reply. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:16, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Nevertheless, she persisted

Hi Elizium23. Sorry for the delay in replying. Sorry you are having a bit of a rough patch and feel like people have been dissing you. It looks like Gerda and some other people are formulating a plan to re-write the material, per User talk:Gerda Arendt#Psalms, and it looks like revision deletion will follow after that. The articles also listed at WP:CP, where the case will eventually be resolved in the course of usual business on that page if all else fails. Don't let the perfect get in the way of the good – Wikipedia will never be completely free of copyright violations, but nevertheless we persisted — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:20, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Copying within Wikipedia

Thanks for your comment on my talk page re copying from one Wikipedia article to another. I've been around these parts long enough that I should have known that. I'll try to remember in future. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 10:00, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Blame (Music Producer)

hi Diannaa. regarding your deletion of parts of my Draft: Blame (Music Producer), quotation marks are used when specifying a song title. those were not quotes in the literary sense. can you please put the Career text back? I will remove quotation marks to avoid future confusion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fulber (talk • contribs) 17:03, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry but that's not what the problem was: the problem was that pretty much the entire biography from https://soundcloud.com/blamethemusic had been copied. You can't do that, because to do so is a violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:44, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I did not get the data from any website. I got that information directly from the Artist in the form of a typed message. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fulber (talk • contribs) 22:42, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

There's a couple of problems: the material was previously published elsewhere online, so we can't publish it here unless the copyright holder releases it under a compatible license. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about yourself or a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:52, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Diannaa, ... I ummm ... was just wondering .... ahhh ... if you had ever considered joining this club? I know you prefer the content end of things, but we could really use some good folk there. (if Precious and Few had a different subject matter I would have considered link there as well) :-) — Ched (talk) 03:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

I suggested this to her last year I think (or I thought it if I didn't). She really should join it. :D TonyBallioni (talk) 03:49, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello

Hi I have got the message and that you have deleted my work on health on Sudan, I Belive it was free sources of information and I am not against the terms of wikipedia but I hope that you can give me a second chance and not deleting the work because it is really important and it was not copyright , it was data been taken from publication and it is free for users.

Have a nice day

Doaa — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doaaosman88 (talk • contribs) 07:56, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Doaaosman88, the content you are trying to add and that Dianaa keeps having to remove is not copied from free sources of information, as you state above. The material from WHO has a license that is not compatible with Wikipedia, the Mayo clinic research is even more restricted. The cite to the Ethopian Journal of Health and Science through the NIH is under copyright, and African Arguments is also published under an incompatible license.

If you believe "everything published on the Internet is free", you fell for a common misunderstanding. Please read our FAQ on copyrights and make sure you understand the differences between licenses we can use and those we can't before copying content from anywhere else, because the next time you paste something without appropriate licensing or permissions, you will be blocked from editing. MLauba ^(Talk) 11:49, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

One Nevada Credit Union

Jarapearson appears to have used this edit to copy content from Banking for Nevadans, by Nevadans. Someone has removed it but does it need to be removed from the edit history? There is a copyright notice at the bottom of the One Nevada Credit Union website the text was taken from. Dharmalion76 (talk) 16:43, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, I will do it, and will warn the user who added the copyvio about our expectations. Thank you— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:46, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Updates to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Page

I received your notification about the changes made to CLSI's page. I was informed by a volunteer from the organization that the information under committees was outdated, and went in to update with new information from the website website. I understand now that I cannot copy/paste directly. Is there any way I can add in additional information under "Committee" that could be helpful to those on this page as long as I write the copy fresh? Not trying to break any rules, just new to this.

Thanks, --Mhickey2018 (talk) 17:00, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:02, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Noted. Now that the information was removed, is there a way to get rid of the templates at the top? Thanks, --Mhickey2018 (talk) 17:21, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

I have removed the copypaste template. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:42, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Two new ones

Hanahnicole001 is adding word for word text from zilindo.com in articles. First one and second one. I removed them and gave her a warning about WP:COPYVIO. Dharmalion76 (talk) 17:18, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

You can save me (and other patrollers) a lot of time if you mention in your edit summary why you removed the content, and in the case of copyvio, the url of the website where you found the overlapping content. I will look after these two now. Thank you, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:45, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

OK I will do that in the future. Thanks! Dharmalion76 (talk) 19:21, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Coronation of Queen Victoria - copied text

I am reviewing this article. If you could help, I'd be grateful. I would just like to know why the section in the article that I believed it was wrong to copy (see Coronation of Queen Victoria#Queen Victoria's account) is OK to be reinstated, according to another editor, who has recommended I stop reviewing the article.

An example of the webpage that text is taken from is here. The website's Terms and Conditions are here. I thought the case was pretty clear cut, but I am willing to accept the advice of an expert. Everything I have done with regards to the article was done in good faith. Thanks, Amitchell125 (talk) 18:48, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

The page says "© Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2012 © Bodleian Libraries © ProQuest" and the Terms of Use page says not to do it. Though documents of this age are normally in the public domain, I personally would not include, given these restrictions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:02, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

This was written in 1838, and published in 1909. Reasons? Have you seen the GA review talk page? He should close the review because he has edited the article so much. Johnbod (talk) 03:38, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Diannaa. It all seemed crystal clear to me when Amitchell125 found the copyright page. I've seen cases like this before (not on WP) where the Queen owns copyright and her express permission is needed for usage. It might seem strange to Americans used to public domain dating rules but it absolutely applies in Great Britain. All the best. No Great Shaker (talk) 10:07, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Another if you don't mind

I didn't revert this one but saw it on my watchlist. Nigade shalmali made six edits to Meditation which consisted of taking word for word text from this book. It also looks like their earlier edits to Azadirachta were taken from this article and this PDF. Dharmalion76 (talk) 13:40, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Done— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:50, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! Sorry to burden you will so much work. Dharmalion76 (talk) 14:29, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

2004 UEFA Champions League Final

Hello Diannaa, sorry to bother again. I was beginning to work on this article when I noticed that the Summary section was copied word for word almost in its entirety from this match report. When most convenient, could you please do the chopping? Regards, RetiredDuke (talk) 16:40, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Crown copyright?

Diannaa, the article Coronation of Queen Victoria is currently undergoing a GA review, and one of the issues that has arisen is over the use of entries from Queen Victoria's journals, which were written back in 1838 at the time of the coronation. A number of the entries, including all those from coronation day, were reprinted in a 1907 or 1908 book (depending on whether the reference or the cites is/are correct), The Letters of Queen Victoria, Volume I.—1837–1843, edited by Benson and Esher. Normally, at that age, it would be seem obvious that this is public domain. The question is whether, as this was a monarch and the UK has Crown copyright, whether this material would come under that. If you look at the website that has Queen Victoria's collected letters, you'll see the following notice: © Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II 2012 © Bodleian Libraries © ProQuest. This is elaborated further under the website's Terms and Conditions page: All rights in Queen Victoria's Journals are reserved to HM Queen Elizabeth II. All rights in the accompanying essays and images are reserved to the Royal Collection Trust and the Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford. The digitised images of the foregoing materials and associated metadata © Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford 2012/13. All other rights are reserved to ProQuest LLC.

So has crown copyright been asserted to the diaries, just to the online published version of them, or not necessarily even there? My impression, from Crown copyright, is that older crown copyrights could run forever, and that might (or might not) apply to the original journals, which were copied (and apparently cleaned up) by her daughter after Victoria's death in 1901 before the originals were destroyed, but some portions had been published in Victoria's lifetime, and of course the publication mentioned above from 1907 (or 1908). There hasn't been any attempt to violate copyright here, just a reuse of material published 112 years ago. I'm not entirely sure that the citing of it is to Wikipedia standards, regarding its public domain status and inclusion, but the intention to give credit is there.

The issue (but not the crown copyright part, which was something I discovered when looking into the copyvio claims) has involved a number of edits to remove/restore the material, discussion at the GA review, and also at WT:GAN#Talk:Coronation of Queen Victoria/GA1 - should be closed. At this point, I thought it was a good idea to get someone well versed in copyvio to take a look and see where things stood. Thanks for anything you can do. BlueMoonset (talk) 22:39, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) If the Bodleian own the copyright—as appears to be the case—you want User:MartinPoulter for that; he's paid by Wikipedia to work with Oxford University (within the Bodleian), and will presumably be in a position to speak to whoever there is able to give a definitive answer. Since the website in question is explicitly set up only to be accessible to readers in British territory, that strongly implies that they don't consider the material to be in the public domain and it's not just a case of them forgetting to remove a boilerplate copyright notice. ‑ Iridescent 23:11, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi BlueMoonset. I was already asked about this case, and gave an opinion at User talk:Diannaa#Coronation of Queen Victoria - copied text above. Short answer: No, we should not include it in my opinion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:32, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa. That's what I was looking for. Sorry I didn't see you'd already been asked. Iridescent, thanks for the additional information. As far as I could tell, the Bodleian only seems to be asserting copyright over their material, which is the accompanying essays and images and digitized images (which may include images of the original diaries). But perhaps MartinPoulter will be able to speak to the copyright relating to the whole project, or at least the diaries themselves. BlueMoonset (talk) 23:48, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

That was my opinion too at first, but when I closely examined the terms of use, I changed my mind. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:58, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

An alternative source has been found: Talk:Coronation_of_Queen_Victoria#Copyright_problem_removed. Firebrace (talk) 12:19, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Faro shuffle

I put a notice in the edit summary but nobody seemed to pick it up. This edit was a copyright violation. It takes the text from here. Dharmalion76 (talk) 14:09, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

To make sure an admin notices and takes action, you request revision deletion using the template {{copyvio-revdel}}. Or you can post here and I will do it. Regardless of the method you choose, it's best to leave an informative edit summary. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:17, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Titus Brandsma

Hello Diannaa. Could you explain in a bit more detail why you deleted several large quoted and cited selections from Titus Brandsma? At first glance I don't agree with your action, but I'm willing to learn from my mistakes, if I've made any. Thanks. brtom (talk) 15:45, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Adding block quotes from your sources is not a good way to build an article. We strive to write the articles using our own words — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:50, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Help with copyright

Hi there, I was wondering if you could help with something. I used this this image in an article which is currently under review for FA. The said picture was uploaded by the author himself under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 International license. A reviewer commented with the following: "The Creative Commons tag on File:Le_temple_sur_les_hauteurs_du_village.jpg is for the photo, whereas there should be an additional tag indicating that the copyright on the pictured structure has expired due to age." Note that the structure in the image is a temple built between the first and second century AD. I looked up images depicting similar structures like Stonehenge and didn't find any additional tags. Please advise. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 17:47, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Lebanon does not have freedom of panorama for buildings. Therefore the image needs two copyright tags: one for the building, and one for the photograph. Please see File:NNC-US-1859-1C-Indian Head Cent (wreath).jpg for an example of how it was done for a coin. There's many such photos missing tags on the Commons, but people don't insist on correct tagging until you get to FA or occasionally GA level. I've added what I think is the correct tag— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:10, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

| Articles 49 and 52 ] were omitted by the person who edited [this] here. Said articles void articles 30 and 31. This said, articles 30 and 31 apply only to works whose author died less than 50 years ago. Article 49 states that the term of protection expires 50 years after the authors death. Article 52 says that right of protection for anonymous or pseudonymous works, expires 50 years after the works has been lawfully made available to the public. ~ Elias Z. (talkallam) 22:05, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright - Additions to TERROIR (company)

Hi Diannaa

thank you for your recent feedback relating to the TERROIR company page, as i am new to Wiki posting, i dont understand how listing Awards in a table or listing years people teach at a particular university can be seen as a breach of copyright. Would you be able to clarfiy for me.

Thank you Gerard Reinmuth (talk) 00:42, 23 September 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gerard Reinmuth (talk • contribs) 22:30, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

I did remove an unsourced list of awards. But that's not what I removed for copyright reasons. Please see the bot report; click on the iThenticate link to view the overlapping material. regarding the awards, each award listed needs a source (and by that I mean an independent reliable third-party source; not a list copied from the corporate website. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:04, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Diannaa, this is because i actually wrote the original text for that page as well, how do i proceed if that is the case? Gerard Reinmuth (talk) 02:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

North Pole

Diannaa, I am sorry to bother you, but my edits to the North Pole web page were refered by User talk:Sphilbrick were rolled back.

His response was: I am currently on hiatus for un undetermined length of time, so I'm sorry I cannot help.

Diannaa is the expert on copyright issues, and might be able to help.

Sphilbrick

---

Below is my request, which hopefully explains to some degree the fact that I disagree with the determinization that this infringed on a copyright. Is it possible for you to help me understand what I need to do to get these updates to the North Pole page back into the page?

---

As someone that has a singular focus, adding USS Submarine surfacing references to the North_Pole article I was surprised by your edit of my changes back in April. As I only visit the page as new articles are released by the US Navy each year, I don't frequent the page, or logon to Wikipedia frequently.

Reverted changes on North Pole: Diff of North Pole

Because I visited the North Pole in 1987 on the USS Billfish (SSN 676) I am interested in documenting these visits on the North Pole page.

Could you guide me as to how to reference the US Artic Submarine Article references?

Needless to say, I don't understand why a russian naval article, would have copyright infringement with articles on US Artic operations.

Source of the information: https://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/uwdc/asl/Pages/default.aspx

Thanks, Tom Canter Tcanter (talk) 03:30, 22 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Tcanter. For some reason the bot detected the Russian copying of the page but not the original US Govt source pages. It's quite likely that if you had included citations at the time you added the content, Sphilbrick would have realized that as the work of the US Government, the content is okay to copy, as long as you provide attribution. This is done for PD nmaterials by including the template {{PD-notice}} as part of your citation. The actual sources are as follows:

• 1980s: https://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/uwdc/asl/Pages/1980.aspx
• 1990s: https://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/uwdc/asl/Pages/1990.aspx
• 2000s: https://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/uwdc/asl/Pages/2000.aspx
• 2010s: https://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/uwdc/asl/Pages/2010.aspx

So, for example, for the first entry, here's what you should have added:

1983: [[USS_Tautog (SSN-639)|USS TAUTOG (SSN 639)]], CDR Thomas R. Kent, conducted operations in the Arctic, 3rd ship to surface twice at the North Pole (Richard Boyle, LT Carl Wales, Rod McLennan, and Bob Vachon). First employment of APEX II.<ref name="ASL 1980s">{{cite web |title=Timeline: 1980s |url=https://www.public.navy.mil/subfor/uwdc/asl/Pages/1980.aspx |website=www.public.navy.mil |publisher=Arctic Submarine Laboratory, US Navy |accessdate=23 September 2019}} {{PD-notice}}</ref>

This displays as:

1983: USS TAUTOG (SSN 639), CDR Thomas R. Kent, conducted operations in the Arctic, 3rd ship to surface twice at the North Pole (Richard Boyle, LT Carl Wales, Rod McLennan, and Bob Vachon). First employment of APEX II.

Notice how I've named the citation. What this means is that for subsequent uses of the same citation, you don't have to include the full citation, but only the shorter name. So for the second entry:

1984: [[USS Gurnard (SSN 662)|USS GURNARD (SSN 662)]], CDR Cliff A. Wiese (Jeffrey Gossett and Bob Vachon) and USS PINTADO (SSN 672), CDR Richard P. "Dick" Vidosic (Dr. Greg Dreyer) became 3rd pair of submarines to conduct rendezvous at the North Pole. CDR (later CAPT) Vidosic served as Director of Arctic Submarine Laboratory 1995-96.<ref name="ASL 1980s"/>

This displays as:

1984: USS GURNARD (SSN 662), CDR Cliff A. Wiese (Jeffrey Gossett and Bob Vachon) and USS PINTADO (SSN 672), CDR Richard P. "Dick" Vidosic (Dr. Greg Dreyer) became 3rd pair of submarines to conduct rendezvous at the North Pole. CDR (later CAPT) Vidosic served as Director of Arctic Submarine Laboratory 1995-96.

See below for how the finished citation displays in the references section. If you'd have even included bare urls as to where you copied the content from, it's possible your additions would not have been removed. But what I've shown you here is the way to format a citation properly. Also note in the above examples I included the date of each event; it would be even better if you could re-write the content into sentences so it is easier to read and understand. But you should at least include the year of each event. There's a starter guide to referencing mark-up at Help:Referencing for beginners. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:07, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

References

M. Stanton Evans quotes

Hello. I see that you removed the quotes I added to my references to book reviews on the M. Stanton Evans article. Could you perhaps clarify for me when a quote in a reference is or is not appropriate? I guess I’m not up to speed. Thanks for your time! Neighborhood Nationalist (talk) 03:49, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

@Neighborhood Nationalist: We don't normally include quotations within our citations unless the material is controversial or likely to be challenged. And we don't normally include quotations from book reviews in an article about an author. Short quotations from reviews of a book are sometimes included in the article about that book, if the book is notable enough for a standalone Wikipedia article. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:15, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for your guidance on moving content between articles. I am very new to editing. I thought those articles are very dated and worthwhile to have a go at them. Rchau (talk) 05:17, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanking for your scholarly attention

Dear Diannaa, Hi. I do express my pleasure to be informed of your scholarly comments on my notes. Sometimes I forget that we are tasked to preserve a copyright for the original speakers or writers. This very wikian policy corresponds to the compilations presented in an academic space. Your remind and remembrance in this regard is highly appreciated.

Anonyeader (talk) 06:24, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Interleukin 24

Hello Diannaa, thank you for your attention on Interleukin 24 a few weeks ago. We'd like to verify the copyright violation claim and possibly turn it into a teaching moment for the student, however, we're unable to access the deleted revisions. Would you be so kind and e-mail me the last version of the article (before your revert) to vojtech.dostal (at) wikimedia.cz? Thank you very much, --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Done — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you :) --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 14:37, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Copypatrol bot has stopped

@Justlettersandnumbers, Money emoji, Crow, MER-C, L3X1, L3X1, and Vermont: The CopyPatrol bot is currently down. Here's what to do when we have issues: I have notified User:ערן (on his talk page) as well as User:IFried (WMF) (via email). That's the current people to notify when there's an issue with the system. If all else fails I ask User:Doc James but I don't bother him unless I'm really stuck; he's a super busy guy both on Wikipedia and in real life. (Doc James is one of the people who helped get CopyPatrol started, and is currently serving on the Board of Trustees.) Just letting folks know what to do, in case I suddenly become unavailable at some point in the future and cannot be reached — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:12, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

I missed one ping: @Ymblanter: — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:29, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

I am generally fairly reachable but when things break I mainly just poke those who know how to solve the underlying issues :-)

CopyPatrol can go down for a number of reasons. One is we run out of API usages and need to request more. Sometimes I imagine the tool simple needs to be restarted.

Let me know if things are not solved in a timely manner. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 17:03, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:48, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

• And here I had hoped we'd just gotten all caught up! Crow^Caw 15:06, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

• And the bot has now been re-started by User:ערן! Happy editing everybody! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:18, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Was it the bot that deleted some of the content I had added to Chipping Campden Peter K Burian (talk) 12:44, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Laptop

Sorry to bother you again. This edit is taken from this blog article. Dharmalion76 (talk) 19:33, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

Kesarwani

Hi, these edits are a straight copy/paste from the copyrighted website mentioned in the edit summary. Can you or one of your stalkers please revdel? I've notified the contributor, although I'm not sure that they realise they have a user talk page. - Sitush (talk) 09:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Woah, they did the same thing on their own user page, which I've just blanked. - Sitush (talk) 10:02, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. - Sitush (talk) 11:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the report Sitush. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:00, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Suspected copyright infringement and sockpuppetry

I saw that you left a comment on the talk page User talk:Phatakey.adt. I am concerned about four accounts were created between July 31 and August 6: Phatakey.adt, Marather.adt, Manes.adt and Dhawans.adt. All four have been editing articles with a high degree of overlap, often within minutes of each other. User talk:Dhawans.adt also shows a copyright infringement. I suspect that all four accounts are a sockpuppet or meatpuppet, and are copying content from copyrighted sources for their other edits. David notMD (talk) 10:45, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

It could be a group of students. Please consider filing a sockpuppet report. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:00, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I will do did that. I also randomly checked one of the articles they have been editing (Secondary metabolite) and saw copyright violation. David notMD (talk) 12:55, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Could you please provide me with details of what you found, so that I do not have to repeat your investigation?— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:24, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

At Secondary metabolite there was text identical to a conference description https://pharmacognosy.pharmaceuticalconferences.com/events-list/secondary-metabolites-and-nutraceuticals but it was NOT content related to what Dhawans.adt added. It is possible that the person writing the conference session description copied from Wikipedia rather than the other way around. I still suspect that Dhawans.adt is copying, but the reference added for that content is to a book published in India, and thus unlikely to have an on-line presence.David notMD (talk) 13:44, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, I will have a look when I get home from work. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:04, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Google searching using snippets of the prose Dhawans.adt finds nothing. If he's copying, I can't prove it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:34, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Phatakey.adt in particular has been editing many articles by adding tables, with a single reference for each table. Examples include Enzyme and Amino acid. I left a query at P's Talk page, asking specifically if the tables are being copied verbatim from the cited books. David notMD (talk) 09:36, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Diannaa you might be able to help at Talk:Enzyme#New_section_-_copyright_issue. Adrian J. Hunter^{(talk•contribs)} 12:45, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Visual Looming Syndrome

Hi, I just realized the page Visual Looming Syndrome has been deleted. I did not find any talks about it, like we had on the maze issues. I was just wondering what copyrights I broke on that page, as you have marked it as a RD#1 Copyright infringement. What comes to all my texts, I always write everything myself, I draw or make my images myself. What sometimes might occur is a snippet of text I use as a placeholder when I am modifying a page, but I am quite sure I did not leave any of that on the page. Cattrina (talk) 12:21, 24 September 2019 (UTC)Cattrina

This dates back a ways. The page was listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2018 December 25. I reviewed the page in April and found some foundational copyright violations and the rest was unsourced medical content, which is something we don't want either. So I removed the material and redirected the page to Looming. There's some discussion at Talk:Visual looming syndrome. Sorry the reporting party did not notify you. I should have noticed that. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:31, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Cattrina (talk) 13:07, 24 September 2019 (UTC)Cattrina

Psalm 150

Hi, I wonder if you could explain to me the rationale for reverting and deleting 91 page revisions from this page, along with dozens of other edits from other Psalm pages that had the copyrighted text from Chabad.org. I had already deleted the offending text in a September 19 edit. Why is practically the whole page history un-visible? Copying Gerda Arendt. Yoninah (talk) 20:41, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

In order to completely remove the material from the page history, all the intervening edits have to be hidden, from the time of insertion of the copyright material to its removal. This means that in many instances, harmless edits have to be hidden.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:50, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, that doesn't make sense to me. I only added the Hebrew and English translation in one edit, and I removed it in one edit. Yoninah (talk) 20:53, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

It's possible for people to view the copyright content in any of the intervening revisions if those revisions are not hidden. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Right. I just figured that out after I clicked "send". Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 21:02, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Just to avoid the next mistake causing hours of work for several people: Is it correct to use the link in question as a reference? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:09, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

I don't know if the website is a reliable source or not, if that's what you mean — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:16, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

What I mean is that there may be a reason to say "This verse was also translated so and so." if we only find a translation out of copyright with old-fashioned language. Reliable or not, the page would reference that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:21, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

You could do that, or add it to external links. There may be other good translations; it might not be appropriate to appear to favor one version over another. That's a content decision that people familiar with the material would have to decide. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:23, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

What I mean is that there may be a reason to say "This verse was also translated so and so." if we only find a translation out of copyright with old-fashioned language. Reliable or not, the page would reference that.

Example. Psalm 150:1

KJV (wikisource): Make a joyful noise unto the Lord, all ye lands.

BCP: O be joyful in the Lord, all ye lands.

free version: ?

version with copyright: A song for a thanksgiving offering. Shout to the Lord, all the earth.

We may have reason to point out that the Hebrew has an initial description which is missing in the King James Version and the Book of Common Prayer. - After edit conflict: the person familiar with he material is Yoninah. I could decide what is best from German, but not from Hebrew. I know that for Bach's vocal works, I favor the translations by Pamela Dellal (and have been criticized for that), which are rather consistently superior to others I meet. - Different question: what can we do about Psalm 100 which has now a (overly) detailed comparison of translations, almost for experts only, instead of the one simple one which caused the problems? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:42, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't know enough about the subject matter to comment on these questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:44, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: Psalm 100 needs to be overhauled per our new Psalm page layout. Should I work on that when I next have time? Yoninah (talk) 21:45, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes please. - Diannaa, I only gave an example for the more abstract case above: the need to reference a difference in translations. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:50, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Franciszek Maurer

Hi while deorphaning I’ve just come across Franciszek Maurer which has a really unusual copyright statement included in the references section. I’ve never seen this before so wondered if this was acceptable for a Wikipedia article. Many thanks Mccapra (talk) 22:22, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes it is acceptable. The licensing information was added by user:Moonriddengirl, Wikipedia admin and copyright specialist, with this edit. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:05, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Could you please use the quote to increase content on the fat fetish page?

I hope you’re having a great day. Thanks for adding the citation. You’re a great help for the page. I’d like to increase the content and the quality/fullness of information of the page. If you keep the quote yet change the opening to it or do whatever you think will make the point of the page more clear with it, that would mean the world to me and the page. Thanks! I hope this page gets the serious attention it deserves. Tieher (talk) 01:03, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Article on books for children with deaf characters

Hi Diannaa I have thoroughly extended the List of children's books with deaf characters article but I now can't work out how to copy and paste the work into the original article. I have tried but the links to the references don't come with it so I'm not doing something right. Would you be kind enough to help me. Hope there are no copyright issues, I've been really careful to this. The article is now a bit on the long side but for now, I just want to get the content out onto Wikipedia asap. Then others will perhaps be willing to break it down into spin off articles once the content is live. Thank you once again for your assistance with this article, as I'm quite new to Wikipedia and not much of a computer geek. Ano34 (talk) 07:09, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

If the references aren't being copied over, it's because you're copying from what you see when you view the finished page rather than what you see when you open the editing window. What you have to do is open up the editing windows of both pages and copy the source code from the draft page into the article. Copying just the lead and the tables is what you want to do. Don't forget to add proper attribution in the edit summary! Don't worry - this is all theoretical; I have gone ahead and and done it for you. I also checked for copyright issues, and found no problems in that regard. The draft is now a redirect to the article. Thanks for working on this. Please let me know if you have any questions. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 10:59, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you I really appreciate your help.;o) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ano34 (talk • contribs) 12:15, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Possible copyvios in Vernon Scannell

Hi Dianna and good morning, assuming ... time, sun, stuff. I was a little worried by the huge chunks of poetry quoted at Vernon Scannell. The poor bloke only died 12 years ago. They do have sources but on checking [7] I see it says it is copyright and used by permission ... I know this is your field, not mine, but surely that does not equal "we've got it up here, so please help yourselves"? Anyway, if you had a moment to have a look I would be most grateful. Thanks, and good afternoon (nearly teatime here!) DBaK (talk) 15:07, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

I agree, it's too much. A couple of short quotes would be okay— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:22, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much for sorting it out.Best wishes DBaK (talk) 23:43, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Las Labradas

Hello Diannaa. I have translated a page from es.wiki. I have added the relevant template[8]. Is that enough? Puduḫepa 20:07, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

You should also state in your edit summary where you got the content. Here is how to do it— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:31, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Murray D. Levy

Diannaa, I did a copyedit of the above article early today, and was struck by how close some of the original material was to one of the sources, http://msa.maryland.gov/msa/mdmanual/06hse/former/html/msa11637.html. It appears that the material was added to the article in this form back in 2009 with this edit, and I imagine that the original source looked like that back then, since Levy didn't leave the House of Delegates until January 2011, 19 months after the addition took place.

It looks like a copyvio to me; I will let you judge the severity of it (about 73 words were added in the edit) and whether the edit and subsequent ones need to be hidden—my copyedit at 03:32 this morning rewrote and expanded the article, paraphrasing the material that I retained (though position titles and year ranges are themselves difficult to vary), so that should be safe. Thank you very much for taking a look. Since this copyedit was done in the context of the latest WP:GOCE backlog drive, I'm going to let them know about the issue as soon as I've finished posting this here (I'll be mentioning that you're looking into it, so expect a courtesy ping from the drive's talk page). BlueMoonset (talk) 19:27, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Revision deletion done. Thanks for the report, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:52, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyvio

Resolved

Can you expunge the edit history? This was a copyvio. QuackGuru (talk) 19:30, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, what part of it is copyvio, and where is it copied from? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:47, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

The text was not placed in quotation marks. I added the missing quotation mark at the end of the sentence. QuackGuru (talk) 21:02, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Quotations are not copyright violations. We don't do revision deletion for that— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:04, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

I'll try to be more carful next time when I quote a source. QuackGuru (talk) 21:10, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Oh no

It's snowing — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:37, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

No school then! --Thegooduser Life Begins With a Smile :) 🍁 21:49, 28 September 2019 (UTC)

Help with copyright problem

Good morning Dianna, I added a great deal of content to Chipping Campden yesterday and numerous citations. I also tried to paraphrase as much as possible.

I now see a note on my Talk page that something from that article was deleted for copyright violation, but cannot tell what the content was and why it was in violation. Was it a situation where I should have used blockquote?

Would appreciate your feedback so I can avoid ever making such a mistake again. Thanks, Peter K Burian (talk) 12:41, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes, the bot listed your edit as a potential violation of the copyright policy. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. I don't think a block quote would be the best solution here; re-writing the content in your own words would be the way to go. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:53, 29 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you, Diannaa. It seems my paraphrasing was not adequate. A good learning experience. Thanks, Peter K Burian (talk) 16:04, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

The good news is that the system deleted only 69 words .... It retained 99% of the many other edits I did on Chipping Campden yesterday. Peter K Burian (talk) 16:13, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Yes of course. I try to be precise and leave intact what I can. Thanks for your goodwill. Happy editing— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

A new question, Diannaa, on a Copyright concern: Today, I did an edit adding one sentence to the end of a paragraph at History, São Bento railway station. My citation includes the full title of the article which is quite long. This is the title: The exquisite São Bento train station, with neoclassical architecture, was built on the site of a convent Is it not possible that the bot will see this phrase and decide that it is a copyright violation? (I suspect that is exactly what will happen.)

It was finally decided to build the station on the site of the Benedictine Convent of São Bento da Avé Maria, which had been ordered built by King Manuel I of Portugal in 1518. The monastery was burnt in a fire in 1783 and later rebuilt, but it was in a state of great disrepair at the end of the 19th century. The building was a convent after it was re-built but lasted only until 1892 when the last nun died. https://www.thevintagenews.com/2018/02/22/sao-bento-2/amp/, The exquisite São Bento train station, with neoclassical architecture, was built on the site of a convent

Peter K Burian (talk) 14:16, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Solved the above issue. I was concerned that the bot would consider the title of the cited article as copyright violation so in the final citation, I used only part of the very long title AND capitalized those words. Hope this prevents the bot from deleting the content. Peter K Burian (talk) 16:16, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

The bot doesn't delete any content. It only flags content; a human has to review it. It is not necessary or appropriate to attempt to avoid the bot from flagging content by altering book titles, titles of articles, job titles, names of universities, or the like. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:42, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

References

PS: Did you know there's some very good templates available to help keep your citations tidy? I've done some work on the above article as an example. Please refer to Help:Referencing for beginners for a good guide to how to quickly format citations yourself. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:52, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Seth Brundle

Hello. I’d like to thank you for pointing out to me that the draft article I had made for Seth Brundle was copied from Wikia. I had no idea, I took the original Wikipedia article and made it a draft article to work on improving at a later date. Thanks for pointing this out and I have taken precautions to ensure the article will live up to Wikipedia’s guidelines. I’ll be rewriting the article from scratch as soon as possible. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by SeanTheYeti452 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Charlie Crist

Hi, Diannaa,

I'm wondering if I could have another pass at my edits on Charlie Crist's page regarding some of the controversies in his gubernatorial campaign. I realize some of the formatting (and perhaps even wording) might have been close to the first Ballotpedia source, but I was under the impression that some of the material from the other AP news articles cited included some material *not* on Ballotpedia, correcting at least one of Rev O'Dozier's quotes as well as his form of address (removing a "the" in front of "Reverend," big deal, yes, but you know...), identifying his position within the Crist campaign, and also including the names of contributors Russell Whitney and Volodomyr Shcherban. I do understand the need to keep copyrighted material with its owners - I've been an editor in print publishing for a few decades now - so I'm happy to rewrite as needed, and apologize if I was a bit sloppy in entering the material on the first go-round (it was between copyediting articles for my day job) and tripped any alerts. Thanks for any advice for next steps. - grant 22:25, 11 October 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Grantb (talk • contribs)

Hi, Diannaa - I've gone back and rewritten the Charlie Crist material more substantially, added a little more about other notable incidents from other news sources. Hope it works! Best, grant 19:44, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Grantb. The current version is okay from a copyright point of view. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:18, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Edits of Petra

Hello Diannaa,

please, can you advise me, in how I can propper update the Petra page with the information about the 3d documentation of Petra? All the edits I did regarding Petra are legit and coming from me, as a member of the Zamani Project, which actually did the spatial documentation of Petra. What must I do, that our edits are been approved? And how our images, which I uploaded, are been approved? Please advice. Thanks so much. Best Ralph Schroeder — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rscapetown (talk • contribs) 08:20, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works. For the images, see Commons:OTRS.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 09:39, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply Dianna. I read the CoI info you send me. I understand the issue, but if I can present reference (Papers, news articles and other media links) which support the information I am posting, that should be not biased information, or? If I put a notice on my talk page that I am a member of the Zamani Project, would it be then ok to publish my text? At this moment I only talk about the text, not the issue with the copyright of the images. Thanks.Rscapetown (talk) 10:46, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

The text is copyright too, so you can't add it to Wikipedia unless it's released under a compatible license. People with a conflict of interest should not be editing the article at all, but instead making requests per the rule at Wikipedia:Edit requests. If you are being paid to edit, our terms of use require you to place a notice to that effect on your user page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:35, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Possible Copyvio at Fire hydrant

Hi Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of potential copyright content in the Fire hydrant article. Regards Woodlot (talk) 14:25, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the report. Most of the pages listed are Wikipedia mirrors. The Wikipedia article hasn't changed much in the last 10 years. I did however find and remove a recent addition that's copied from elsewhere. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:53, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Chainat Hornbill F.C.

Thank you Diannaa, next time i will add to Wikipedia by written in my own words. ThailandFootball (talk) 06:11, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Question

Hi Dianna. Would you mind taking a look at this and this and make sure I didn't overreact. Personally, I'd like to know where my posts are being posted by others and it seems like really bad practice to do be copying pasting posts made by others onto other pages, but it might not be a WP:COPYVIO per se. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:13, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

It's not a copyvio per se, but rather a violation of the terms of our CC-by license. Also, it's confusing as heck, because it appears that an editor made the post on that page when they actually posted it on a different page. When people have to copy such material (such as at ANI or other noticeboards) they often highlight the copied comments with green using the template {{tq}} and state clearly that it's copied and where they got it from

Oh hey, another thing, the website justpacific.com probably does not own the copyright on the thesis and has no right to add it to their website. We should not therefore be linking to it in articlespace, per WP:ELNEVER. It's not clear from the rule whether or not it's ok to place the link on the talk page though — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:52, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for taking a look. I thought all that might be needed was PATT for the talk page comments, but wasn't sure. I did mention that in the post I left on that editor's user talk, but didn't think of {{tq}} or {{talk quote block}} at the time. Even so, I do think that simply copying an pasting even with proper attribution in the edit summary probably isn't a good idea without some clear way to let those reading the discussion understand that the comments they are actually reading were made on another page.

I never thought about the thesis link possibly being a COPYLINK problem; if that's the case then I believe relevant policy covers linking to any Wikipedia page, not just articles but it certainly means it cannot be used as a citation. One possibility would be to cite the thesis along the lines of WP:SAYWHERE I guess if it's consider a reliable source per RS and RSCONTEXT. That's what's currently being discussed at RSN, which is where the comments that were copied and pasted originally were made. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:32, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Just going to add that links to this thesis from the same website have also be added as citations/external links/"See also" entries to Kubuna and Vunivalu of Bau, but there may also be more articles where it's being cited. There's also some questionable references cited in the "Vunivalu of Bau" where it looks like the editor in question is trying to cite or add images files uploaded to Commons as references, which are possibly scans photo copies from the thesis or other publications. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:52, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Here's how to find out: There's a thing called Special:Linksearch where you can find all links to a site. There's 18 links to justpacific.com — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:09, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Dianna. Would you mind trying to explain to Saqiwa why he should stop doing things that lead to this kind of edit. Copying content from other talk pages onto his talk page might be something he's doing for record keeping purposes, etc., but it's not necessary. Even though it might not be a "copyvio", it does seems to be starting to cause problems with other editors which is not a good thing at all and might eventually outweigh whatever positive contributions he may be making to Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:44, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

ASSIST (student exchange organization) - copypastes from official website

Hello Diannaa, could you revdel the recent additions in this article please if you got a bit of time? Repeated copyright violations (and promotional COI editing) from the organization's own website at [9] and [10]. I left the user a brief message on the user's talkpage, but copypasted content got re-inserted. Thank you for your help. GermanJoe (talk) 08:45, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for the report! Future admin! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:56, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Copyvio edit

I was unable to put the URL in the edit summary or the copyvio-revdel template because the URL is blacklisted but this edit comes from https://www.censusindia.co.**/towns/kapadvanj-population-kheda-gujarat-802571 if you remove the ** and add "in". Dharmalion76 (talk) 17:07, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Done. Also, warned the user. Fun fact: dropping the https: prefix also works for these blacklisted urls. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:07, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

I didn't even think of that so now I feel pretty dense. Thank you again. Dharmalion76 (talk) 20:52, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't intend for you to feel bad. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:56, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Johnnie Moore Jr.

Thank you for bringing that copyright info to my attention (and doing so kindly). I'll be sure to reword and source properly. I appreciate any and all feedback as I'm fairly new to this editing role. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mckaylagrace (talk • contribs) 14:20, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Copyvio at Ghrelin

Hello Diannaa: could you please do a copyvio review of recent edits at Ghrelin? New editor User talk:Suzanne Dickson is an accomplished scientist and publisher on this topic, but appears to be copying directly from her own publications, and inserting content and using her own sources for the article. I will be taking this up on the Ghrelin talk page. Fyi, her publications list on PubMed. Following your talk page here. Many thanks. --Zefr (talk) 14:30, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry but there's no way for me to check articles that are behind a paywall. The CopyPatrol bot can see behind paywalls, and reported nothing so far. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:10, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

Twin Sisters (cannons)

Hi. Can you take a look at this article. The quotes are sourced, but are they too much?Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:10, 3 October 2019 (UTC)

It's quite a bit, but it's public domain material. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:20, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Grunewald

Hi. I'm not sure if I'm breaking any copyright here. Now I can blame you if I am. SlightSmile 17:50, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

It's not clear from the Google translation of the remarks on the page as to whether or not the uploaders own the copyright to this film. I don't think you should link to it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:03, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Reverted. Thanks. SlightSmile 18:15, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you.

Hi Diannaa - I assume you are referring to the photograph I added of Billy Drummond. I bought that picture for Billy Drummond's free use from the photographer Roberto Cifarelli but I'm not sure how to go about proving that. The same picture is his home page. We have no idea who took the current picture that is being used or where whoever created the page got it from. I am pretty sure it was taken at a rehearsal in Japan and was used for a temporary website we made around about the same time. Can you use home page pictures freely? It all seems very random. Tessa Souter (talk) 19:13, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

My message was regarding prose, not a photograph; there was some content that was the same as that at https://www.billydrummonddrums.com/discography-2, which is not released under a compatible license. I don't know which photo you mean, as the one currently in the article (File:Billy_Drummond_20080719.jpg) has been present at the Commons since 2008. Why are you describing yourself as "we"? Who are you working with? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:36, 5 October 2019 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

I appreciate the thank you that you sent. I don't use Wikipedia often but I do try my hardest to edit pages that are incomplete. My proudest edits are to the King Company page (added that paradise Bay game would be discontinued) and to the Everwing Page (Facebook Game). The Everwing page was out of date since the game had changed so much. MK8 Master (talk) 01:59, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks!

I just started a draft of a wikipedia page yesterday, and overwhelmed by what I should and shouldn't do, decided to give it a start without having read all the rules in detail. I paraphrased most in my own words but had two sections where I lazily copied and pasted for paraphrasing later. I appreciate your prompt reply and edits, and succinct summary as to why you removed certain lines. I find that people like you help make the experience much easier for newcomers, and encourage more to contribute. I hope you keep doing what you're doing, contributing to a wonderful realization of truly free and open information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrmlhermitte (talk • contribs) 16:11, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind words. Good luck with your editing career— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:28, 6 October 2019 (UTC)

HP Indigo page

Hi Dianaa and thanks for the note regarding a few of the images uploaded on the page . Each one is a different case and I want to ensure that I can attribute the right license for each and submit the right documents/letters as needed. It will take a few weeks. Until then, thanks for the note and the instructions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colaborandotodos (talk • contribs) 07:29, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Pictures fair use query

I'm currently editing List of most expensive books and manuscripts and there are a couple of 20th century documents that I was wondering if including a low res (75px) picture of the documents would count as fair use. The documents are

• Einstein's "God letter"
• Letter from Einstein to FD Roosevelt
• Letter from Francis Crick to his son
• A Notebook of Alan Turing's

Thank you, Hochithecreator (talk) 17:53, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry but fair use images are not allowed in lists or galleries. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:34, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Lisa Taddeo

Hi there. I apologize for any issues on Lisa Taddeo's page. I am unable to see the revisions but from what I remember the only things removed that I took from the nyt article are:

“

• who grew up in New Jersey and attended medical school in Bologna, Italy, where he met her mother,

• In Italy, her mother gave birth to her older brother, and the family moved back to New Jersey, where her father opened a family medical practice.

• two-bedroom farmhouse

”

These are fairly generic statements to constitute a copyright violation, but I suppose I agree I could have changed a few words around. That was my thinking at the time. Thanks for letting me know to change even general biographical quotes. Sorry for any inconvenience. Also, happy 10-year Wikipedia birthday Diannaa! I grieve in stereo (talk) 19:20, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi I grieve in stereo . 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. There's no reason why this content could not be re-written in your own words, or omitted altogether, as it's not even about her - it's about other members of her family. "Quotes" have quotation marks, and should be used sparingly, per our non-free content rules. Thanks for the wiki-birthday greetings. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:30, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Lyrics question

Hi Diannaa. I came across All-American Girls Professional Baseball League#Theme song while checking on some images being used in the same article. Do you think it's OK to include the lyrics like this per MOS:LYRICS? -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:43, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

We have to assume the lyrics are copyright unless proven otherwise. I've removed them. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:29, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:51, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy First edit day!

Hey, Diannaa. I'd like to wish you a wonderful First Edit Day on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! PATH SLOPU 10:00, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:31, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Invitation to join the Ten Year Society

Dear Diannaa/Archive 66,

I'd like to extend a cordial invitation to you to join the Ten Year Society, an informal group for editors who've been participating in the Wikipedia project for ten years or more. ​

Best regards, Chris Troutman (talk) 13:43, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Congrats! Kierzek (talk) 13:44, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Chris and Kierzek!— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:00, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Copyright on handwritten documents

Sorry, just to clarify, what is the copyright status of handwritten letters and autograph manuscripts of books. As these works were never published, intended to be published, or publishable do they have the same copyright status as a normal book. Thank you. Hochithecreator (talk) 20:42, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Hochithecreator, (Speaking about US standards) Handwritten vs. typed vs. painted vs ... doesn't matter, as long as the work was "fixed in any tangible medium of expression". Writing it down certainly meets that requirement. Unpublished works generally have similar protections under copyright law as published works. In the US, unpublished works where the death date of the author is known are protected for 70 years from that date. If the death date or author is not known, or it's a corporate work, the work is protected for 120 years from creation. For more information, see c:COM:Publication. --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 22:11, 8 October 2019 (UTC) (talk page watcher)

File:Julang-2 SLBM.jpg

Can you please sacrifice a few seconds to review this image’s rationale?— Vaibhavafro ^💬 10:47, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

A case could be made that there's no way to get a free image of this object. On the other hand, the image doesn't tell us anything that couldn't be described in words alone, and everybody knows what a missile looks like. So: fails NFCC #1 and #8. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:32, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Fausto J Pinto

Dear @Diannaa: This article is on my watchlist. This morning I noticed the sole editor has been copying raw content from Fausto J Pinto's own page again and the earwig reported it about 93% copyvio. I made an attempt to do clean it and copyedit, remove the copyvio, fix the references and link it, but the editor has reverted it. I think they want the content from Pinto's page. Can you please add it to your many entries in your todo list. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 11:36, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, I've done some revision deletion and notified the user as to what the problem is. Thanks for the report. PS I will watch-list as well for a while. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:40, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Anthony Kennedy and Deutsche Bank

I am the sole author of the prose that was copied. Also, the prose had been deleted from Anthony Kennedy's article and was more appropriate for another article.

The material on the Anthony Kennedy page had been deleted because the passage was more to do with relationship among persons at Deutsche Bank (Justin Kennedy, who is Anthony Kennedy's son, and others) and Deutsche Bank's unusual relationships with Donald Trump. I had written the passage, but it had been removed from Anthony Kennedy's page by SunCrow because "remove ridiculous footnote that has to do with Donald Trump and has nothing to do with Anthony Kennedy". I could not deny what SunCrow stated. The passage was more appropriate somewhere else.

You are very correct for this user to state that the passage had come from a previous article. However, the passage had been deleted from the article.

I'll state a more appropriate remark in future edits so that the location of the original passage will be included, even if the passage has been deleted.

Thank you for correcting me. 67.53.214.86 (talk) 22:09, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Not sure how to respond

OK, this is a first I have encountered... Special:Diff/920648545. What could possibly require the existence of a Wikipedia article?

Assuming he's telling the truth and not just some generic spammer, clearly this guy is using the site for self-serving purposes. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 01:59, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

He is apparently the subject of the deleted article - how he stands to gain or lose is a mystery to me too. Not sure, but I don't think he's notable. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:55, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Copy-vios

Hello, you may not remember but a few months ago I asked for help with copy-vios at 2 or 3 articles about parks in Croydon, UK and subsequently, following your advice, dealt with others myself. What I have discovered is that several articles were started up to ten (possibly more) years ago by the same editor. I have a suspicion that they may have also edited from one (possibly two) other accounts but don't seem to have edited for 18 months or so. Is there anything we should do at this late stage such as WP:CCI? I cannot see any warnings for content CV at their TP... some in relation to images though. THanks. Eagleash (talk) 20:45, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello again Eagleash. If there's multiple (at least five) articles with unresolved copyright issues, a case can be opened at WP:CCI. However keep in mind that 10-year-old edits become very difficult to assess because of the proliferation of Wikipedia mirrors. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

OK thanks: At least 11 articles have already been dealt with; I don't like to think about how many others there may be! I think all the ones so far have been a direct lift from the Croydon Council website and / or the parks book (pub. 1988) as described in an earlier thread. Doesn't seem anything needs doing right now? I will continue to check other similar pages and clean up as necessary. Cheers. Eagleash (talk) 21:33, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Suspected copyvio

Appears that in Draft:White House Conference on Food, Nutrition, and Health the editors have copied content (the conference program) verbatim from the 1969 article in Nutrition Today: https://journals.lww.com/nutritiontodayonline/Citation/1969/00430/The_White_House_Conference_On_Food,_Nutrition_And.9.aspx. David notMD (talk) 22:29, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi David notMD. How did you determine this? The content is behind a paywall, and Earwig's tool shows little overlap. Can you remove the copyright content? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:45, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

What is copied is from the first page of the article, which is shown at that URL. It consists of the titles of the sessions and the speakers and their university affiliations. Basically, a list, published in a journal. The editor takes a position that the conference was a federally funded event, and thus in public domain. David notMD (talk) 01:06, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

A chronological list is not copyrightable. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 04:59, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

I shared that information with the editors who are working on the draft. David notMD (talk) 17:58, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

OK thanks— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:42, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Continuing copyvios

Hi Diannaa, hope all is well. It looks like Syntellectus has continued adding copyrighted material to Gaia hypothesis, even after your warning. -- LuK3 (Talk) 01:29, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi, guys, this is [[user: Syntellectus] but is it really a copyright violation if the creator of this content on another website is myself? Besides, I've made citations of that article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Syntellectus (talk • contribs) 02:36, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Hi Syntellectus. There are three problems with what your trying to do.

1. Wikipedia cannot really use content verbatim from other websites unless the content has been released under a free license that Wikipedia accepts. So, even if you create content and add it someone else's website or even your own website, copying-and-pasting it word for word or even very closely is going to most likely be seen as a copyright violation. If you change the licensing of the source website, then perhaps it can be used on Wikipedia.
2. Most content you find on third-party websites is written in a manner or tone which might be fine for that particular website, but which is almost always not acceptable per Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. When you add content to Wikipedia, you're basically writing in Wikipedia's voice which means most people reading the content are going to assume it's being written by Wikipedia unless it's properly attribute to a particular source. So, when you use pronouns like "we" or say things like "it's believed" or any other words or expressions to watch, you might know who "we" refers to but the reader will not. So, just because you find something on a website that is licensed in a way that it can be used on Wikipedia, doesn't it mean you should use it word for word on Wikipedia.
3. The last problem has to do with Wikipedia:No original research and trying to cite your own work as a source. Wikipedia is really only interested in what secondary and independent reliable sources have to say about something; it's not interested in an individuals own research or theories unless they are things which have been discussed in secondary and independent reliable sources. Trying to cite your own work may also be seen as a conflict of interest; so, it's best to discuss your reasons why on the article's talk page first.

It seems like you're trying to make a major revision to the article Gaia hypothesis; so it might be better to be WP:CAUTIOUS and talk it through on the article's talk page to get feedback from others. It's OK to be WP:BOLD, but when you're WP:REVERTed, you're going to be expected to follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle to try and establish a consensus in favor of the change you want to make. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:20, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Immortal 32

Hi there. Haven't bothered you in a bit. Can you take a look at the above article? My feeling is that there is way too much quoting in it.Onel5969 ^{TT me} 17:47, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

It looks excessive, but it's public domain. It's an editorial decision how much to include, as it does not violate NFCC. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:57, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

User:Justin86e

Hi. I see that you've warned Justin86e. So did J. M. and General Ization. Well, so did I. However, before your warnings, I sumbitted the following to WP:AIV, but nobody paid attention to it. It is clear case of WP:NOTHERE.

Extended content

Not here to build an encyclopedia. Edits consist of wide range unwanted changes, from minor hoaxes to serious vandalism. For example: [11] DVD Player (Windows): Content randomly copied from elsewhere (table of releases from the Windows Media Player article [12] WebOS: Bombardment of irrelevant navboxes [13] DreamWorks: Major hoax, might have assumed good faith if it was the only instance [14] Production company: Content copied from elsewhere [15] List of United States over-the-air television networks: Childish content faking, reverted by User:Mrschimpf [16] International BBC television channels: Childish content faking [17] 2 Entertain: Fake contents [18] Lists of corporate assets: Childish addition of misleading phrases, reverted by User:Mrschimpf [19] List of Pixar films: Adding a fake name, reverted by unregistered editor [20] Film: Link hoax [21] Arms of Canada: Link hoax [22] Helmet (heraldry): Minor hoax [23] BlueStacks: Minor bad edit, nothing serious [24] 3 (disambiguation): Minor link hoax, reverted by User:Bkonrad [25] History of the flags of the United States: Minor mischief (removal of a link) [26] Monarchy of Canada: Harmless bad edit, reverted by User:GoodDay flowing dreams (talk page) 08:26, 12 October 2019 (UTC)

Since you are still an uninvolved admin, I thought I'd better let you know before going to my next option, ANI. flowing dreams (talk page) 05:24, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Will Arnett was in Ratatouille. How is that a fake name? Some of your other diffs are similarly cryptic. Regardless, another admin has blocked 31 hr. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, but as the voice of Karl Horst not as a screenwriter. I thought since you've been an admin for 9 years now, you're experienced in these matters and a feeble attempt in WP:SNEAKY wouldn't fool you. Sorry if I was wrong. Also, the #1 item on my list is blatant vandalism. But the good thing is, this was the last time I would bother you. Have a nice day. 😊 flowing dreams (talk page) 06:22, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

I didn't notice that. Sorry for the mistake. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:21, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

flowing dreams: There was really no need to announce at ANI that I made a mistake. That's kinda mean and unnecessary. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:59, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Oh! I ... hurt your feelings? I'm sorry. I didn't mean to. How careless of me. I'm a little surprised as to how you know about ANI. So, what do you think I must do to remedy that? Struck your name from the table? flowing dreams (talk page) 14:04, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Removed. flowing dreams (talk page) 14:11, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

I was notified via the notification system that you had wikilinked my name in the report you filed. Surely you must know how notifications work? since you used a noping template in this very thread. Thank you for removing me from your report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:32, 15 October 2019 (UTC)

Requesting friendly mopping service

Diannaa dresses up to mop up

Hi Di! So... Ekenney.21 has posted the entire script to Bee Movie on their userpage (compare with [27]). I'm concerned that the usual revert+CV template is maybe too BITEy to put on a new editor's userpage. So I'm going to post a message on their talk page about it, and I was wondering if you could do the admin-y parts? (Not sure if deletion or revdel is the right way to go here.) Or, if you think I should handle it the usual way (revert and CV template), let me know and I'll do that. Thanks either way! – Levivich 20:27, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

We also get the Shrek script, the Hamilton script, etc. Some of this is caught by edit filters. It's usually vandalism (as well as copyvio). Rev-del is done. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:44, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

LOL - thanks! – Levivich 22:01, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Clergy (film)

Hi, Diannaa. An IP edited the plot section on the article Clergy (film). As you can see here: [28] It's a COPYVIO. I reverted the edition, but someone needs to "fix" the article history. Regards.--SirEdimon (talk) 21:25, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Rev-del done. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:47, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. You're great.--SirEdimon (talk) 22:04, 14 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your message

I added the proper attribution to the pages I edited that should have it. Thank you so much for bringing this to my attention! I wasn't sure about its placement though. I just put it at the end of the articles. I hope that was OK. When you have a moment, can you double check me? No rush, of course. I know you guys are swamped.

Sincerely, Dastultz (talk) 12:17, 16 October 2019 (UTC)Debbie

Hi Dastultz. Thanks for doing that. It's better to put it in the references section though, or you can include a template {{PD-notice}} as part of your citation like I did here. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:43, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Akane Yamaguchi

Hello. This article is too long, need to omit some unnecessary paragraphs, help summarize this article (and copy edit). Thanks you. Olascf (talk) 13:24, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry I don't have time to help with this project. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:25, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Reverting the deletion of page

Hi, I read your reply on my page. So, can you revert the deletion of the page Lalbaugcha Raja Sarvajanik Ganeshotsav Mandal? I will delete/replace the words which are similar to the words on the page Lalbaugcha Raja with my own words. It was only the History section of the page Lalbaugcha Raja Sarvajanik Ganeshotsav Mandal which was kind of similar to the history section of the page Lalbaugcha Raja, though I did form different sentences than the one on the latter's Wikipedia page. Can you revert the deletion of Lalbaugcha Raja Sarvajanik Ganeshotsav Mandal page? Prat1212 (talk) 20:25, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

I am not actually the person who did that. Someone else did, with this edit, saying that the temple is not notable enough for a standalone article. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:15, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

Censorship of Pete Buttigieg article

Why go out like that? All claims were well sourced 172.58.230.201 (talk) 22:58, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

I have never edited that article and have never heard of the guy, so I don't have an opinion — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:04, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/delete&page=Pete_Buttigieg says you repressed an edit 172.58.230.201 (talk) 23:49, 16 October 2019 (UTC)

What I did was perform revision-deletion of an edit that included copyright content copied from the New York Times. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:05, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

You spend your time erasing any log of changes that have been reverted anyways because the verbage was too similar to the New York Times? It seems plausible you didn't want a well articulated, detailed and sourced log of an increase in crime in South Bend because of Buttigieg's poor relations with African Americans.. 172.58.230.133 (talk) 15:38, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Did you know, I live in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada? Events in South Bend, Indiana are of little interest to me. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk)

(talk page stalker) What seems plausible, 172.58.230.133, is that – with the greatest respect – you may not yet have a thorough understanding of Wikipedia's policies on, and problems with, violation of copyright or WP:COPYVIO as we lovingly call it. It's a big big problem here – with the longterm potential to kill the project – and Diannaa, one of the encyclopaedia's hardest-working editors, does a colossal amount to counter it. We should be thanking her, not attacking her with implausible political theory and the insulting you spend your time attempted put-down ... I have to say that the latter is somewhat typical of my Granny, which in this context I'm sad to admit is not a good thing! Honestly, Diannaa is just doing her (voluntary, unpaid) job, and very well. I promise you. Wikipedia will only survive on good sourcing and avoiding copyright grief, along with collegiate behaviour and a cautious approach to most things. Happy editing! DBaK (talk) 09:20, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm aware that this site, which considers Snopes, Politifact, Buzzfeed, Mother Jones to be "reliable sources" but considers the Daily Mail, Daily Caller, TheBlaze, The Sun to be "partisan" has an extreme leftist bias. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources But even so, their own rules are frequently violated, even when their preferred sources are used -- like here -- https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2012_Aurora,_Colorado_shooting&diff=670478396&oldid=670454535 . And administrators are able to permaban without providing details (this user still likely does not know who he was accused of harassing) -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Optim.usprime . Or how about an article where 112 of the 560 edits were made by a single user "Beyond My Ken", who largely deleted posted sourced details and accused at least a half dozen others of being biased, while he showed a preference for sources like diverseeducation, which he considered more reliable than The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Fusion https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cooper_Union_financial_crisis_and_tuition_protests&offset=&limit=500&action=history . However, I digress. Diannaa's narrative is that she "could care less" about events in South Bend, Indiana. So why was she reviewing Pete Buttigieg's deleted logs? Still, I honestly don't care except that I would like the edits I made to be viewable (you can even upload a screenshot or 2 to imgur), so that I may use elements of them to improve the Pete Buttigieg article, which is pretty clearly being whitewashed by a half dozen or so people who feel it is "consensus" that crime rates in a city in which a person serves as mayor are irrelevant. 172.58.227.58 (talk) 22:12, 18 October 2019 (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. However I am not the person who removed the content; I only hid the violation of the copyright policy. The content was removed twice by two different editors for reasons other than copyright: edit summary: "None of this is relevant to Buttigieg personally, he isn't even mentioned "; edit summary: "Thi sseems WP:UNDUE You will ha ve to seek consensus on the talk page if you want this included in the article"— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:53, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

PS. You misquoted me: I did not say "Could care less"; I said "Did you know, I live in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada? Events in South Bend, Indiana are of little interest to me." I have heard of South Bend and know it's in Indiana but that's about the extent of my knowledge of South Bend. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk)

Ok. Are you unwilling to send a link to the paragraphs I typed? "I would like the edits I made to be viewable (you can even upload a screenshot or 2 to imgur)" --> would you do at least this? 172.58.227.174 (talk) 16:59, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:27, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

The parts highlighted in pink match the NY Times article; the parts highlighted on mauve match this article in Vox.com. Not all of the material you added was in violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:41, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Not viewable to me though. Could you copy / paste the text to my talk page? Thanks! 172.58.227.153 (talk) 12:28, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not going to copy-paste the material - it's copyright. Please visit the original articles: NY Times article, Vox.com. From the NY Times, content from the sentence beginning "...on June 16, when a white sergeant...", and four complete sentences, beginning with the sentence that starts "Reports of violent crime increased nearly 18 percent..", plus the sentence that begins "Since Mr. Buttigieg took office in January 2012...". From Vox, the sentence that begins "And in 2012, two months after taking office..." — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

You could put quotes around the copyright protected parts and post to my talk page.. Not only that though, I cited 2, if not 3, nytimes articles and npr also. At least post all the sources used.. 172.58.238.146 (talk) 22:22, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

• https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/17/us/politics/buttigieg-police-shooting.html
• https://www.npr.org/2019/07/02/737976138/buttigieg-tries-again-to-woo-black-voters-amid-race-controversy-in-his-hometown
• https://www.vox.com/2019/6/27/18759807/pete-buttigieg-town-hall-protesters-police-shooting-2020
• https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/30/us/politics/pete-buttigieg-south-bend-police.html. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:35, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

deletion of added content to Telescopic handler

Hi Diannaa, To Comment left by Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:03, 16 October 2019 (UTC) and the deletion of added content to the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telescopic_handler The newly added content on Telehandler licences is based on my own contributions to a website I own www.duralift.com.au and therefore I don't believe there has been any copyright infringement. Please advise how to grant permission to use the content from that website. Thanks, --210.8.203.58 (talk) 02:31, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

If you are the copyright holder and wish to release this material under a compatible license, please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:10, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Big copyright mess

• Therapeutic photography (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Pinehouse Photography Club (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Dreerwin (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Hello! I encouraged the above user today to make a new page: Therapeutic photography. The writing was so good that I did not realize until later that the (new) user had just made the page by copy-pasting from sources. The same goes for Pinehouse Photography Club. I just removed whole paragraphs from both that were direct copies of multiple sources. I am pretty sure the rest is copyvio, but do not have Proquest etc access. Since you are an admin and a copyvio expert, I came here, naturally! Thank you. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:11, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

User Dreerwin was blocked for socking. Now we are just wondering at AFD how much of Pinehouse Photography Club is direct copyvio. Same goes for Therapeutic photographyThatMontrealIP (talk) 05:03, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I have nominated Pinehouse Photography Club for G12 speedy deletion; the remaining material was copied from https://www.pinehousepc.com/pinehouse-photography-club. The overlap becomes readily visible using Earwig's tool when comparing with the Google text-only cached version. I've done some revision deletion on Therapeutic photography. That's a worthwhile topic but not only will it need an expert on photography, but it will also have to comply with WP:MEDRS — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:39, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for everything! The speedy was the proper outcome. I have recreated Pine House Photography with 100% original prose, so we will see if it survives without the COI and copyvio concerns. Thanks again, your help is always very appreciated.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:35, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

David Sanders (gastroenterologist) copy vios

Hi Diannaa, apologies for the late message. I would like to begin by thanking you for your work on copyvios, your efforts are highly commendable. To cut to the chase, I am a fully disclosed paid editor and I am now representing David Sanders (gastroenterologist) on behalf of [Stream]. They contacted me thismorning after having attempted to update their client's page with more copyvios and (quite rightly) having their edits reverted and the page G 12'd. They have admitted to being unaware of Wikipedia's COI rules or international copyright laws, I know this seems hard to believe but after speaking with them briefly I can kind of see how this might be possible... Anyways, although my COI prevents me from editing the page directly, do you think if we were to remove any copyvio content and rewrite anything that isn't WP:NPOV the page could be saved? I have no idea where the subject meets WP:GNG but given that the page has been live for some years and hasn't been challenged I'm assuming the subject does meet WP:GNG and this is just a copyright issue? Essayist1 (talk) 09:45, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

The article has not yet been deleted and is available for editing. The entire page is copied from the subject's website and need a total re-write. An editor assessed as meeting the notability guideline at the time the page was moved out of draft space. But this does not mean that the article has been permanently accepted; that's not something we do. You should not edit the article yourself if you have a conflict of interest. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:23, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I know. Essayist1 (talk) 17:15, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I see User:thatmontrealIP has trimmed the content but the content is still the same as the subject's website and still doesn't read like a Wikipedia page. I'm guessing that you're both too busy to rewrite the content. How about if I rewrite the lede and early years and education section, then post my writings as edit requests on the talk page? Essayist1 (talk) 17:32, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

• Mr. Paid editor Essayist1 has just gone ahead and recreated David Sanders (gastroenterologist)., despite his agreement not to above.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 02:10, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Exactly when and where did I agree not to recreate the page? I really resent the term recreate, that implies the page is exactly the same as it was, it's not. I created the page as a draft, and only edited the page when it was in draft. I put the page through AfC making my COI clear at every turn. I was very careful not to use any original research or any text which may be deemed promotional. Now the page is live I have no intentions of editing it directly.Essayist1 (talk) 06:36, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Request for page protection

Hi Diannaa, Could you please increase the protection level for the article Wikipedia, due to vandalism thank you! Gumshoe97 (talk) 11:39, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Gumshoe97. There's no need to change the protection level on that article. It's already semi-protected. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:15, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I mean so only extended confirmed users and admins can edit, because semi protection proves inneffective. Gumshoe97 (talk) 19:51, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't think that's appropriate. If you want a second opinion, please post at WP:RFPP. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:40, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

YGM

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

- FlightTime (open channel) 23:58, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Long John

Greetinggs Diannaa I have received your message about the deletion of part of the draft article on Long John. Because am developing my skill, I might have erred in copying and pasting. But my intent was to get a piece then develop it later without leaving it in its entirety like that. The reason why I left it in bold. My understanding was that since it was a draft, it hadn't really been published enough to raise eyebrows. Obviously I was wrong. I wanted to ask the subject to clarify on a few things before I modulated it appropriately. My apologies. Give me permission to cite the same topic but while using my words please. Regards. Mlajum (talk) 17:22, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Please don't add copyright content to Wikipedia, not even temporarily for editing. Please do your amendments before you save the page, or use an external editor. You don't need my permission to continue working on the draft. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:00, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Deleted changes to MarketInvoice article

Hi Diannaa‬. Thank you for your comments. The changes that I have implemented in the above article have been requested by the company itself (MarketInvoice). They have also provided me with the new copy. Therefore I am not sure what to do now. What evidence should I ask them to provide? TIA for your reply.Tatiana.grehan (talk) 18:43, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:59, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello again! Sorry, I was not very clear in my message. The company (MarketInvoice) has requested the service of editing their Wikipedia page from the SEO company that they are working with. They provided them with a copy, which has been forwared to me with a brief. I am a subcontractor of that SEO company. Therefore I am not directly involved with MarketInvoice. If you still think that there's a conflict of interest, please advise who can implement the requested changes so that it did not violate Wikipedia rules. Sorry that I ask, but I really do not understand how it all works.Tatiana.grehan (talk) 19:06, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Of course you have a conflict of interest as Wikipedia defines it, because someone has instructed you to edit the article, presumably for pay. If you are a paid editor, you are required by our terms of service to place a notice to that effect on your userpage or user talk page, and you should preferably not be editing the article at all. See WP:PAID for details. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:10, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Edits of Guardian101

Hello, Diannaa! Can you talk to Guardian101 (talk · contribs), please? This user constantly removes the German occupation of Western Russia from List of military occupations (diff1, diff2), despite a clear evidence like, for instance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-occupied_Europe. I've tried to talk with Guardian101, but it's not efficient.

Take a note that you reverted Guardian101's similar edit in the article Nazi Germany two weeks ago, when this user tried to remove the Soviet Union from the infobox, claiming "The Soviet Union was never occupied". This time, Guardian101 uses similar arguments in the edit summary like "Western Russia was never occupied because the Soviets drove back the Germans".--Russian Rocky (talk) 18:58, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I've reverted his removal and sent him an edit warring template. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:06, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Diannaa. I hope the issue has been finally resolved.--Russian Rocky (talk) 19:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

For your enjoyment

Hello D. I saw your mention of Edmonton above and realized that means this weather is already occurring for you :-) Enjoy the rest of your weekend. MarnetteD|Talk 19:18, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Ha ha. You forgot to mention our baffling Soviet-era architecture — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:02, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

HeeHee and brrrr. That poster make me feel chilly just looking at it. MarnetteD|Talk 21:12, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

Temporary watchlist option

Temporary watchlist option

For obvious reasons, assuming the development team builds a temporary watchlist option, your views on automatically incorporating it into Copy Patrol would be welcome.--S Philbrick(Talk) 13:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Deleted changes to MarketInvoice article

Hello, Diannaa! I have disclosed the fact of being a paid contributor (the disclosure message can be seen on the article’s Talk page). Please advise if I can now continue to work on editing this article in order to address the multiple issues highlighted for this article by WP editors (for this purpose new copy has been provided by the company itself). Thank you in advance for your kind advice as to how to proceed.Tatiana.grehan (talk) 18:57, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

What you need to do is propose changes on the article's talk page (you can use the {{request edit}} template). An experienced editor will review your request and implement the edit for you if it's a suitable addition/amendment. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:13, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Changes to Apostolos Nikolaidis (singer) page

Hello Diannaa,

Many thanks for your comments regarding Wikipedia and copyright as they relate to the page I edited. I completely understand and respect the rules and want to abide by them. Most of the content on this page existed for many years before my most recent updates, and unfortunately, with the edits now made, not only were many of the recent additions removed, but so was most of the previous information already on the page. As a result, the page now feels like it been reduced to a shell of what it was, with little useful information.

I am the owner of the biography source copyright; I recently created a new handle as my old handle is linked to a defunct email address and I could not reset my password and log in under that account. I would like to follow protocol for donating the biography verbiage so that it can be included again on this page in some form. I thought that the biography information had already been edited down, but it sounds like perhaps it was not paraphrased enough. At any rate, I would like to donate the source material so that it may be added back to the page, at least in part and paraphrased appropriately, as I believe it is useful information.

Would you be able to guide me through that process or refer me to the right place? Otherwise, would you recommend I take another stab at writing the biographical information with enough paraphrasing so it is differentiated?

Sincere thanks again.

Msasson (talk) 21:09, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry but I investigated and it looks like the source website has existed since 1999. The material appears to have been copied from there right from the beginning. It's not okay to add previously published material to Wikipedia, even if you are the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder and wish to release this material under a compatible license, please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. Alternatively you could re-write the material. Either way, it would be a lot better if the sole source of data was not the subject's own website. Multiple sources independent of the subject is what's recommended, and helps establish notability. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:19, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Understood and makes sense. Thank you for the information and the quick reply, much appreciated. – Msasson (talk) 21:32, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Liberty/Libertà copyvio

Thanks for removing the copyvio from this article. Looking at the history, it looks like an IP added more copyvio in the revisions immediately preceding the ones you revdel'd, if you can take a look when you have a moment. czar 22:38, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

I think I found the diff of which you speak. Please check and get back to me if I did it wrong. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:32, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Bible-Presbyterian Churches (Singapore)

Dear Dianna, I restored contributions in version as of 1 Nov 2016 by StAnselm et. al. While I think the materials from the sources used in my contributions fall within fair use exception, I’d appreciate it if you could list what you see to be actual, potential and probable violations of copyright policy in the version as of 01:36, 29 Sep 2019 (appreciate receiving a copy of the text) so that I can try rewriting by rephrasing and reducing direct quotations. I’ll also try to reduce the length of the article. Watchman1234 (talk) 11:11, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

It's not okay to add copyright text to Wikipedia. Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. You must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. The two main places where I found material had been copied from were this and this. The article as it existed on 01:36, September 29, 2019 was almost four times the recommended article size of 10,000 words. I have sent you a copy of that version of the article via email. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:36, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

WPA film library

Hope you're well, Diannaa. Re the above, did they really film (e.ge) the House Select Committee hearings themselves (e.g. [29]), and so able to claim the copyright? I'd assumed that the cttee would film itself and therefore be under the governmental open licence? Any advice you could offer would be great. Cheers, ——SerialNumber54129 17:44, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm not following you. What is this in reference to? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:28, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Apologies! Well, I would have liked to have used a 10 second clip of someone taking the oath to the committee in 1974, as a means of identifying the subject of the article. But the clips I linked to above seem to have their copyrights claimed by WPA Film Library; my question really is, do they actually own the copyright to a film of a govt hearing? I assumed it would be the committee filming itself, in which case it'd be an open government license? Unless it was filmed by a news Corp I guess. Any suggestions? Thanks very much for sparing your time for me! ——SerialNumber54129 08:51, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for not understanding your question! Now I get it! I checked their terms of service and it states that unless stated otherwise, they own the copyright. Individual clips do not have copyright information on them so I was unable to determine how we would determine anything further. Most clips are hidden from view. I was able to preview some Watergate hearings material but even that did not have any copyright info. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back, and apologies for my tardiness in doing so. Most of the clips are about a minute long (I think); d'you think if I cut one down to say 10 seconds it could be used with a FUR? Justification: it would portray the subject of the article; he is now 40-years dead; and it would be a sufficiently short clip as to not harm potential sales. Thoughts? Thanks for the help with this, it's appreciated. ——SerialNumber54129 17:21, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

You could do that. Or you could consider trying to capture a still from the film. So kind of you to apologise! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:41, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

I like to, ever now and then! Gives me practice ;) I'll see what I can do, I'll try the latter if the former is too complicated. Thanks again and have a good weekend! ——SerialNumber54129 18:29, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Amon Goth edit

Hi there. I see that you reverted my edit on the Amon Goth page, due to a lack of proof. However, I am absolutely certain that his execution was filmed. I've seen it myself. Just look it up on Youtube. Sorry I didn't cite the source though. I'll do that later. Scorpions13256 (talk) 17:14, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

I know about the video on YouTube, but it's not of him. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:24, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Would the image of a city recorder ticket for public drunkenness and disorderly conduct be protected by copyright?

Hi Dianna, hope all is going well with you. Would the image on this page of a city recorder ticket issued to Hank Williams for public drunkenness and disorderly conduct be protected by copyright? Carlstak (talk) 01:25, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:27, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Carlstak (talk) 02:07, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Clarity on Greg Mescall edit

Hi there. Appreciate the review, although I am confident that the copyright wasn't an issue and/or was a coincidence/oversight. However, in an effort to learn I wanted to compare previous/original versions, but they are now gone, so I am not even certain what part(s) were problematic. Anyway to prevent that in the future, or possible in this particular article's case? Thank you in advance. transitionse —Preceding undated comment added 19:47, 25 October 2019 (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.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:53, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

Removal of copy/pasted website content

Thank you Dianna for catching this; I was unfortunately swayed by the absence of copyright marks on the related webpage. A properly paraphrased version of the original copy/pasted paragraph will be inputted shortly. Best regards. DigiNomad (talk) 01:08, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Removal of copy

The material I added to the J. Edgar Hoover entry was from my book published by Random House which is copyrighted by me as cited in the published article I wrote and that is referenced as the source. Please reverse your removal of the material.--Ronald Kessler — Preceding unsigned comment added by KesslerRonald (talk • contribs) 14:35, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

There's a couple problems: While some of the material I removed was quotations from the book, some was copied from https://www.newsmax.com/RonaldKessler/mccarthy-conservatives/2008/04/07/id/323380/ and https://www.thedailybeast.com/fbi-director-hoovers-dirty-files-excerpt-from-ronald-kesslers-the-secrets-of-the-fbi as well, and the copyright to those webpages would be held by someone else. Another problem: you should not be adding quotations from your own book to Wikipedia, as that is considered to be original research. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:33, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Should I worry?

Hello! I hope it is a nice day where this user lives in Alberta at 1142! I removed a brutally beaten and misshapen lump of text here because I objected to the horrendously clunky effect on the article lead, which it sort-of ignored while giving it a good kicking anyway. However, I now realize that it's rather close to the newspaper text here which I suppose will have come from a press release or some similarly encyclopaedically valuable source. So, should I worry about it being a possible copyvio, or can I go on just being grumpy about the actual editing? <g> Please advise. Thanks and best wishes DBaK (talk) 17:42, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

It appears to be a nice day on the surface, but it is actually quite windy and cold. At least the place (unlike California) is not on fire at this time, so there's that. Regarding the article, the content in question is actually a better match for content here and elsewhere, so I am going to do some revision deletion in a minute here, as soon as I check if there's anything else that needs to be removed. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:39, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Not being on fire = definitely good! Glad to hear it. Thanks very much for your help with the article – I'm glad it wasn't just my addled perception of it. Cheers DBaK (talk) 22:57, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Metal transporter CNNM3

With reference to the above subject, I would like to ask you if is possible that you revise my draft and publish it. I am working on a university project and my teacher says that he won't revise any draft(he only grades articles). Nevertheless, he gave us 4 weeks while the revision period can last until 8 weeks! Would you mind helping me? Thank you, BQUB19 OPortals (talk) 12:32, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't have time to help. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:39, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Do you know any other editor willing to help? Thanks BQUB19 OPortals (talk) 13:30, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:54, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for guidelines on article editing

Thank you Diannaa for the advice on how to edit Otto Scharmer. The edits were requested by Otto Scharmer himself to his team, so that's why the wording is similar to the one found on his website http://www.ottoscharmer.com/bio. Footer of that page indicates "Creative Commons. 2004 - 2018 Otto Scharmer" (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/), is that not sufficient as "source material in the public domain"? I am wondering whether adding in the quotation marks and the inline citation would be sufficient to make it appropriate. I'd like to avoid creating an edit that will be removed again and penalise me as an editor. I am really keen to learn to do this right. Is it better that I create my revised edits in a sandbox and submit for review, before attempting direct edits to the article? Also, I'd like to know whether cancelled edits still count towards building up my "Wikipedia editing profile". Axial Shift (talk) 08:32, 28 October 2019 (UTC)Axial Shift

Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International is not a compatible license, because some provisions in that license are not present in the license we use.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about yourself or a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:05, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Please revert deletions

You've just deleted a whole days work stating copyright issues when all I put in was my own work, plus some press references which were properly linked in the footnotes! It would be great if you could revert this deletion but what I've done is gone on myself and re-entered it making sure every point has a web reference and most often a separate press reference too. I hope this works as I don't want to lose hours of work and legitimate info again. WKCOTE (talk) 11:42, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

I removed some of the material because it had no citations, but there was quite a bit that I removed because it was copied from https://web.archive.org/web/20130912032922/https://www.childrenontheedge.org/our-history.html. Copying from elsewhere online is a violation of our copyright policy. Everything you add to Wikipedia needs to be written in your own words. Please see the message on your talk page for more details.— Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:14, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy Adminship Anniversary!

Wishing Diannaa a very happy adminship anniversary on behalf of the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! PATH SLOPU 13:33, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:54, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

Happy anniversary, Diannaa! 2dmaxo (talk) 09:05, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Yes, congrats and keep pushing that mop, we all benefit from the work you do. Kierzek (talk) 11:14, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft: Gama Platform

Hello Diannaa,

You've recently remove half of the draft I was working on ( Draft:Gama Platform ) and I don't really understand the reason for that...

In the message you said "remove copyright content copied from [sources]" but all your sources are in GDPL licenses and the pages from the Gama Platform website have been especially set in CC-BY-SA license to avoid every problem of that type... :/

I'll be happy to discuss with you about your decision.

Regards, --RoiArthurB (talk) 17:13, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Replied at Draft talk:Gama Platform — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:03, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for the valuable feedback.

Sati010 (talk) 23:14, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Jack LeCompte

Dear Diannaa,

You just sent me a message in regards to the wikipedia page for Draft:Jack LeCompte, which I began to create today that you had removed material that you assumed was copyrighted by an another person. Please note the following: I (Lisbeth (Liz) Jensen) own the content on his website jacklecompte.com. Jack LeCompte hired me back in 2010 to create a website for him - it's created under my company name: ScienceMusicArt (http://sciencemusicart.com/). I personally wrote the content on his website based on his biographical information he gave me. Unfortunately Jack LeCompte passed away a little more that a year ago. Although I do understand that you have to remove copyrighted material - but I don't understand why you did so with out checking with the author first. Thank You - Lizjensenmusic (talk) 02:03, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about yourself or a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:15, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Ebenato

hello Diannaa, I would like to bring your attention to the above page I created. It has ben due for publishing, but really cannot get why it hasn't been done. Could you pls find time to kindly look into it? Thanks a bunch! 2dmaxo (talk) 09:03, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

Woodstock, Virginia

I actually was going to ask you about this article because the content being added did have a copy and paste feel to it. I probably could've saved myself some time and energy if I had done so, and you the trouble of having to revdel so many diffs. I suspect there might be more copyvios still to be found on that page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:17, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

I think I got it all cleaned up now. I will do revision deletion in a few days, to give the editor a bit of time to see what-all I removed. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:20, 1 November 2019 (UTC)

Would you mind taking a look at Talk:Woodstock, Virginia#Excessive detail and perhaps clarifying/correcting anything I've gotten wrong? It now seems as if there're blocks of content from other Wikipedia articles being incorporated, which is probably fine from a licensing standpoint but doesn't seem too desirable for other reasons. The recent editing spurt might have unintentionally created some more things to clean up. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:55, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

The new edits look okay, as does your message on the talk page. Thanks for all you do — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:40, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Cartoon Network (Taiwanese TV channel)

Restored to redirect; E789999 used my redirection to Cartoon Network (Taiwan) to create a new article at Cartoon Network (Taiwanese TV channel) that was just as empty. Thank you for your vigilance and persistence in retaining the rd. Nate • (chatter) 23:25, 31 October 2019 (UTC)