Jump to content

User talk:Diannaa/Archive 79

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 75←Archive 77Archive 78Archive 79Archive 80Archive 81→Archive 85

Possible Copyvio

Hi, Earwig is giving me copyright violation warnings for both Prospect Hill (New South Wales) and a new page Prospect dolerite intrusion. The editor who created the new page has left a message saying they had copied alot of the text from the Prospect Hill page. Anyway I'm not too sure how to proceed. I've tagged both pages but could you please take a look? Best Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 10:28, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Content in both articles was copied from this page, which is released under a compatible license. The required attribution is already present at the bottom of both pages.— Diannaa (talk) 14:22, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
Content in Prospect dolerite intrusion does have some overlap with this article, but it's two quotations and an alphabetical list, so no copyvio there either.— Diannaa (talk) 14:28, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

iThenticate question

Hi Diannaa, are you able to load any of the iThenticate reports from CopyPatrol? This morning, all the ones I've clicked on have stalled for a few minutes and then they just say "Redirecting to similarity report..." with the ";(" emoji. Is it a Toolforge issue or just me? DanCherek (talk) 12:43, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

It's not just you, and it's not just iThenticate. Earwig's tool is not functioning properly (any search seems to time out), and even the Duplication Detector is failing to load. There must be a problem at Toolforge (or there's maintenance underway).— Diannaa (talk) 12:50, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Ah, darn it. Hope it gets fixed soon! Thanks for the update. DanCherek (talk) 12:53, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Hey Dan, I was just about to ask at WP:VPT and discovered this report: Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Tools down. — Diannaa (talk) 13:08, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
Working for me now! DanCherek (talk) 13:37, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
The CopyPatrol bot has not yet re-started. It is set to automatically re-start when there's been no new reports on the board for four hours (actually four hours and ten minutes, if I recall correctly) so it should restart by 15:30 UTC or so. — Diannaa (talk) 14:02, 2 November 2021 (UTC)

3 topics that requires your assist of judgment

Dear User:Dianna,

This is francabicon here and i would like to seek your assistance of judgement regarding the matter of my edit on three topics:

Here is my edit:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Malaysian_United_Indigenous_Party&oldid=1053371794

Here is my edit:https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_Malays_National_Organisation&oldid=105337095

Here is my edit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Malaysian_Islamic_Party&oldid=1053371583


Here is the problem I've edited 3 topics of Ideology, Controversy whit assisted contribution by many members but has been taken down by this User:Amir Noor Muhammad. I repeatedly told the user that if he has any arguments of this topic the user can talk to me about it but the user didn't just not talk to me about it and removed large chunks of our contribution of it which i don't think is fair for the people who had place an effort contribution to the new section of the page. Also adding to the fact that he had many Controversy on this talk page where the many user had criticize him for similar behaviour like that which you may check right over here: User talk:Amir Noor Muhammad.
Also the user had written to ban me from editing with his recent revert. The reason that the user always revert my edit is that "it's not related" "personal not on party lines" which i then replied to him stating that " so long as they are part of the party their political action is related to the party" but the user still insist on reverting.
Hope you understand that i don't mind to be wrong but i would like your best judgment on what you can do to resolve this matter because those topics are with valid links and valid facts. Thank you.
hope to hear frm you soon do talk to me if you do want to know more. User talk:Francabicon

Sorry I know nothing about this topic and am not interested in helping you with this content dispute. Please consider using one of the dispute resolution methods listed at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.— Diannaa (talk) 21:24, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Gratitude

Thank you so much for all the work you do. I just decided to take a break after three straight days on the Ruigeroeland CCI because I am so burned out. If I got burned out after only three days, how do you feel after doing things like this for years?! Again, thank you. Scorpions13256 (talk) 17:56, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the positive feedback, much appreciated.— Diannaa (talk) 21:17, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Stand-up Comedy

Thanks for your message concerning the page edit. I would be grateful for more detail on the reasons for deletion, you mentioned copyright, Could you be specific as to why sections don't comply. I wasn't aware of lifting sections verbatim. I think the page as it currently stands is very poor and is desparate need of editing, I am acting in good faith to try to remedy this. I'd be grateful for any suggestions, Thanks. WakeUpBoo (talk) 19:41, 4 November 2021 (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 what the bot found. It's against the copyright policy of this website to copy your prose from elsewhere. Everything you add needs to be written in your own words please. — Diannaa (talk) 21:19, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

I have re-written the text, shall I re-post it or does it need to be checked beforehand? WakeUpBoo (talk) 01:50, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

I can check it for you if you would like to send it to me via email.— Diannaa (talk) 03:38, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for your help, appreciated. WakeUpBoo (talk) 14:51, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

3 Marquess of Bute

Hi, sorry about confusion regarding copyright infringements, I just wanted to add I've updated my Talk with the articles that might needs a look at, it was my honest mistake in good faith and the issue will be rectified. Cltjames (talk) 18:10 eastern time, 4 Nov 2021. — Preceding undated comment added 22:10, 4 November 2021 (UTC)

Your revision on Important marine mammal areas

Hi, I understand that there are rules that have made you delete some of the text I have entered. I am not familiar with the ways to correctly do what I have been trying to do, and I am not sure I have the time to learn it by trial and error; however, there is a problem that I have been trying to solve. Someone has created the Important Marine Mammal Area (IMMA) entry unbeknownst to us, and the entry has several important mistakes that portray incorrectly the IMMA tool and the IUCN Marine Mammal Protected Areas Task Force that has created IMMAs, which is something that we need to avoid at all costs. I see two options to address the problem, which I am submitting to your kind advice: a) you take down the current IMMA entry, and we eventually make an entirely new one; or b) we find someone who will facilitate our wrok at the current entry so that we will be able to rectify all the wrong information that it contains. Your help will be very much appreciated, thanks. Disciara2.0 (Giuseppe Notarbartolo di Sciara, IUCN Marine Mammal Protected Areas Tas Force Co-chair).— Preceding unsigned comment added by Disciara2.0 (talk • contribs)

There are a couple of problems. 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) 16:16, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that Wikipedia is like LinkedIn or Facebook, where the organization controls the page. That's not at all true. Wikipedia articles are not corporate profiles; they are encylopedia articles that are created and maintained for the most part by Wikipedia editors.
Another point: You appear to be using more than one account: OceanGill and Disciara2.0. Using multiple accounts is for the most part not allowed. Please use only one.— Diannaa (talk) 16:58, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

1. I have noted your information, thank you. We are really not concerned about having the profile of the Task Force (a non-commercial entity) on Wikipedia. We are concerned about rectifying information about the "Important Marine Mammal Area" (IMMA) initiative that was posted by someone we don't know, which provides wrong information about them which is potentially damaging. IMMAs are a tool for marine conservation freely provided to the conservation, business, academic and governmental communities recognised by intergovernmental policy organisations, and we are keen on ensuring that the information which describes them is correct. There's got to be a way to attain such goal without infringing copyright and conflict of interest rules. 2. I am not using more than one account. What you are seeing is two people dealing with this matter. We operate as a Task Force and I am sharing this concern with others. I hope in your understanding. Disciara2.0 (talk) 08:24, 7 November 2021 (UTC) Disciara2.0

Wikipedia entries are not "profiles"; they are encylopedia articles. As far as I can tell the current version of the article does not contain any incorrect information. If you wish to make suggestions for improving the article, please consider making an edit request or the article's talk page. Don't copypaste any content from the organization's website while doing so.— Diannaa (talk) 11:06, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Help requested with user incorrectly copying within WP

Hello Diannaa! I've tried to warn the user Alpha Lion (talk · contribs) about copying within Wikipedia two days ago (a 4th warning), but they just went on to reinstate the content without attribution and adding more unattributed copy-paste work to it. There's clearly some good faith in the fact that they added "Copied from the article" multiple times in the article itself (see the previous diff), but they do have considerable trouble understanding the concept. Especially the fact that there's a big recent message on their talk page explaining the concept of edit summaries makes me think they have a serious WP:CIR issue. I think they would benefit from some more forceful admin attention, like you could give, if you're up to it. Thanks! ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 16:19, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

I don't normally block for this – I would simply start adding the attribution myself. In extreme cases I remove the added content with an edit summary "Remove content copied from [page name] without attribution". I will add another note on their user talk.— Diannaa (talk) 16:28, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

Chi Beta Phi

Hello Diannaa. You deleted a section I'd recently added to Chi Beta Phi. While similar to the About us page on that fraternity's official website here, for your ease of reference, I made a number of changes to the three or four sentences used, which it appears were the description of the group's official crest. A reference was provided, though because the lines were paraphrased, that section was not in quotation marks. I'd like this reverted, please. The claim that this was a COPYVIO here was too aggressive. You blanked the section, so I cannot analyze it right now, but if memory serves, every sentence, and most clauses of each sentence were changed.

This is, of course, a technical definition of a crest. As such, it is difficult to veer too far from its original text and still maintain accuracy. I could, alternatively, simply blockquote the original. Jax MN (talk) 16:31, 6 November 2021 (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 what the bot found. The content was only slightly altered from what's present on the website. Quotations are allowed, but only when there's no alternative. In this case the alternative is prose that you write yourself.— Diannaa (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
Following up, do I read this correctly, that because the bot said I used 55% of the same words, it was problematic? How does the algorithm differentiate between desirable similarity, in the case of legal descriptions, versus plagiaristic similarity, as when commercial writing is stolen?
I have communicated with you before, and wish to state clearly that I appreciate your work as an admin. I've rewritten the paragraph, at some risk of losing clarity, and again, in this case, note that this action was too aggressive. Especially in your deleting and then redacting: I note in the Wikipedia:Revision_deletion#1 criteria, the explanation to "only redact what is necessary (i.e. leave non-harmful fields visible)." In this case, the material you redacted was certainly 'non-harmful'; it was simply a legal description of a crest, which a reasonable, disinterested party would judge to be a helpful dissemination of that information. I.e: the fraternity at question would find it beneficial. I have done what you asked, in rewriting, but I honestly don't see the rationale here, for such an aggressive removal and redaction. Jax MN (talk) 17:07, 6 November 2021 (UTC)
I don't go by what the bot says or percentages. I use my own eyes to compare the text in the source with what is added to the article. The content you added was not a "legal description"; it was prose copied from the organization's own web page. That's a violation of our copyright policy.
You have misinterpreted the meaning of the revision deletion policy; the meaning of the phrase "only redact what is necessary (i.e. leave non-harmful fields visible)" is intended to convey that we need to be careful and selective, only hiding those revisions that are violations of the copyirhgt policy and to leave the remainder unhidden.— Diannaa (talk) 17:23, 6 November 2021 (UTC)

You may be interested

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Franz_Staudegger&action=history


You had dealt with some apparent copyright issues there in May 2021. Dawnseeker2000 09:30, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Doug Weller took care of this. Dawnseeker2000 11:20, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Yes I saw that. The IP geolocates to Perth, Australia, which surprised me. It's likely not the guy I thought it was initially.— Diannaa (talk) 11:22, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Finished Christianization of the Roman Empire as caused by attractive appeal

Finished it - finally - and ran it through Earwig, [1] and it keeps coming up with those Frontline quotes, but otherwise it looks okay. Now it has to go through new article review, and when I put in my username to check on it, a copy vio note or tag or some such thing from you is still there. I was wondering if you would mind going and clicking that it has been fixed. That whole section turned out to be useless and got deleted completely. The ironies of WP. Thanx, Jenhawk777 (talk) 05:04, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Do you mean the note in the page curation box? It's not from me; it was added by a bot. There's no way to remove it, not that I know of. — Diannaa (talk) 13:24, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
Here: [[2]]it says only you can click it. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:52, 10 November 2021 (UTC)
I am not going to change that, as there was a violation, which has now been fixed.— Diannaa (talk)
I thought you needed to show that it had been fixed - there is no other changing of anything to be done - just one click that it had been fixed. The record of it would still be there. But it doesn't matter any more. It's been reviewed now. I'm sorry to have bothered you. Jenhawk777 (talk) 04:24, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Take down

Why did you take down Mark Kostabi's list of solo exhibitions while numerous other artists have similar lists on Wikipedia? 184.152.3.132 (talk) 01:05, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Francis Martin O'Donnell

Your edits of this biographical article appear excessive, and you have vandalised recent additions which did not breach any copyright, and included important source references for text that remained in place but is now unsourced. Please revert those arbitrary edits Seneschally (talk) 08:22, 10 November 2021 (UTC).

Sorry I can't restore the text, because it is copyright content copied form elsewhere online, including here and here, which is a violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 14:01, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Dementia edits

Hi Diannaa, thank you for noting the problems with the Dementia edits. Do you mind giving me a little bit more information about the errors so we can try to improve the article? I did not look at the edit from a previous wikipedian for https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD010079.pub3/full. Kind regards, JenOttawa (talk) 23:53, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

The editor copied the first sentence of the section "Author's conclusions".— Diannaa (talk) 13:25, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! At first I thought that you also had to revert my edits that came after theirs. Now I see that you just had to make my edits "invisible" in the history so that the copywrited information is not shared in the edit histories. It looks like my edits have been maintained. I was really worried that I had somehow made a mistake as well!!! Great that you caught these cases of copyright. Hopefully the individual realizes their mistake and paraphrases evidence next time. Have a terrific day! JenOttawa (talk) 13:44, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
As you have deduced, 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 like yours have to be hidden. Sorry to alarm you.— Diannaa (talk) 13:49, 11 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi, no problem at all. Please feel free to correct my mistakes anytime! Your efforts on Wikipedia are greatly appreciated.JenOttawa (talk) 13:54, 11 November 2021 (UTC)

Caney Mountain

Hi Diannaa, this article Caney Mountain looks like it has some serious copyvio going on, could you take a look for me please? Regards Hughesdarren (talk) 00:08, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

done— Diannaa (talk) 00:53, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism in page Rajiv Gandhi Intermational Airport

Hi, An unregistered User 2405:201:C001:D0A0:6175:D01E:89A7:F208 (talk) has been giving some hard time by continuously adding content with some unreliable source in the page Rajiv Gandhi International Airport. While i have been trying to prevent the page from vandalism, this particular unregistered user is does not seems to be stoppable. He adds booking site as a source, while i think it cannot be taken as reliable source. Correct me if i am wrong. And if not, please help me in preventing vandalism in page Rajiv Gandhi International Airport. Thankyou. Random Haste (talk) 11:06, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Astroworld Festival crowd crush

Hey Diannaa, there's a lot of relevant info here per the law and there's at least 7 other instances of copyright issues throughout the article from other users the same argument could be made for, but that's neither here nor there.

Just curious for suggestions on cutting down the information to one sentence to still satisfy the reporting as relevant to the event without triggering a copyright tag. Nothing's in quotes. Thanks. Onan808 (talk) 18:15, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

I am nowhere near finished the copyright cleanup and will get back to you soon with a comment.— Diannaa (talk) 18:23, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
I had deleted the record on your talk page here as I was going to try again with the abc13 story to not get a copyright violation but apologies if you wanted to leave it up here.Onan808 (talk) 18:44, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

pvlib python

Hi, thanks for your feedback, but I am a little confused as to what was removed and what was copyrighted, b/c the content are just gone. What was not copyrighted corrected? All of the material from pvlib docs have a BSD licenses which allows mix and reuse. I'm happy to make changes, add quotation marks, but it's really hard to know what to change if the content is completely gone. -- Mikofski (talk) 19:05, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 19:13, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! Much clearer now. I had another question about paraphrasing or adding quotation marks and providing a copyright notice or proper attribution on my talk page. Thanks for your time. -- Mikofski (talk) 20:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Advice?

Hi Diannaa, I'm getting in over my head with Harold F. Reichenthal, which is almost verbatim the obituary on NeptuneSociety.com, but which the creating editor claims to have written and submitted to Neptune before publishing it as an article here. (See User talk:Deisenbe#Harold F. Reichenthal) I pointed Deisenbe to WP:Donating copyrighted materials which he believes is unnecessary. Not sure what steps to take next. Schazjmd (talk) 21:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

I find I cannot date the obit, so I don't know which was published first. So we really have to have that OTRS ticket, or a re-write. I have listed the case at WP:CP.— Diannaa (talk) 23:13, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate your assistance, thank you! Schazjmd (talk) 23:14, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Al-Natili

Hi, I have removed Turkish text from Al-Natili. It seems to be a copyvio from http://busbed.bingol.edu.tr/tr/download/article-file/299712 based on the Earwig report https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Al-Natili&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0. Please can you rev del. TSventon (talk) 08:33, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Done. Thnak you for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 12:16, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Pls revert tulu script page

This a unilateral decision to delete that page. If some information looks like a copyright ed content then pls delete that part. But not the full article. There page needed for tulu script. Even I am also learning and researching tulu script. Pls it's my humble request. Even before publishing this article we have placed discussion on talk page. Where most of the people agreed to create this page. Mr anonymousMr (talk) 13:56, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

The page was removed as a result of a deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tulu script. So I cannot restore it. However most of the content was copyright content copied from elsewhere online, and cannot be restored for that reason as well. To do so would be a violation of our copyright policy.— Diannaa (talk) 14:36, 13 November 2021 (UTC)

Egyptian National Police copyvio

That page looks like it has content that was copy-pasted from https://web.archive.org/web/20111204112901/http://www.moiegypt.gov.eg/English/AboutMOI/HistoricalBackground/. Thepharoah17 (talk) 01:23, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

I have removed it. Thank you for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 15:05, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

November 2021 - climate change in Europe

Hi @Diannaa, many thanks for your message about the Climate change in Europe page. I'm still a new editor and only want to make the best contributions to different articles. Thanks for your guidance. Noura2021 (talk) 16:12, 15 November 2021 (UTC)

Linguistic data sentences

Under your analysis, articles Colorless green ideas sleep furiously and Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo would seemingly have to be deleted, which linguists would consider to be very, very strange... AnonMoos (talk) 04:42, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

You appear to have misinterpreted what I said. I can't find the conversation though, as it does not appear to have been with you, as I have never visited your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 12:50, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

American Athletic Championship ~ (copyright)

I went back and fixed American Athletic Conference Football Championship Game (selection criteria). Let me know how it looks or see anything else. Thanks Bearcats fan (talk) 18:25, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

The new version looks okay from a copyright point of view. Thanks for taking the time to do that.— Diannaa (talk) 20:44, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Please examine File:Hiddenfigures.jpg

This is a picture of Emunah La-Paz, which is a formal alter ego of the uploader. The picture appears online at, and is likely sourced from https://www.littleantproductions.com/about-us-black.html. Little Ant Productions appears to be a production company owned and/or managed by the uploader. Thus at this point all is probably satisfactory.

However, the picture is a poster of the movie Hidden Figures, a copyright work, with La-Paz standing in front of it. I do not feel competent to judge whether the addition of the person is sufficient to render this picture allowable here.

There is background you should be aware of. The AfD of the article and the quantity of indignation from the uploader is useful information for you. I know that this will not prejudice your unbiased review of copyright status, I simply wanted you to be aware that this matter is sensitive. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 08:55, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

See https://opencorporates.com/companies/us_az/23160049 regarding Little Ant. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 10:38, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
I've tried and probably failed to track down the named photography organisation Lea Lashay, who may or may not hold the copyright to the photograph (but obviously not for the poster). The closest I have got is https://www.georgiacompanyregistry.com/companies/creations-by-lee-lashay-llc/ but I have no idea if they are the one. They only started trading April 2021
I have also filed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vhubbard just now, really because of loud quacking FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 12:54, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
I noticed the freedom of panorama issue as well - both the copyright holder of the poster and of the photograph itself would have to release the image under license for us to be able to host the image. Thank you for all your work researching and filing various reports on this case. — Diannaa (talk) 14:12, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
After further thought I have added a {{di-dw no source}} deletion template to the file as well.— Diannaa (talk) 14:15, 17 November 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. I have never quite understood derivative works, and I am certain that the uploader will not. I am better informed now but still feel incompetent in the field. But, like Henry Ford, I know whom to ask! FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 14:23, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Cryptocarya mackinnoniana

Hi Diannaa, I've just reworded some of Cryptocarya mackinnoniana so that Earwig says it is now passable. I was wondering if some of the revisions might need to be struck out. Could you take a look when you have a minute please? Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 11:44, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Mamieisblue#Cryptocarya mackinnoniana. — Diannaa (talk) 14:25, 17 November 2021 (UTC)

Block

Hi. The user who has been blocked by you Theshabbyone, renamed. FYI, Thanks. chansey msg? 17:09, 17 November 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vincent Vega (talk • contribs)

I have unblocked, the new user name is acceptable.— Diannaa (talk) 00:16, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Questors

Hey. What's the best way to tag a YouTube video screenshot that displays a print newspaper? Example. Thanks as always. El_C 14:56, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Derivative work with no evidence of permission. {{Di-dw no source no license}}— Diannaa (talk) 15:04, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. Follow up questor: is this one of those trick tags that angers the bots, though? El_C 15:10, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean? — Diannaa (talk) 15:13, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
I mean, that tag looks unhappy (like {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}) — is it even feasible to upload an image like that, or is that tag basically just for show? El_C 15:25, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed}} is intended for talk pages and you are supposed to give a reason, i.e. {{Di-replaceable fair use disputed|your reason here}}
{{Di-dw no source no license}} will add the file to a deletion category and the file will get deleted a week later.— Diannaa (talk) 15:41, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Oh, so you get a week with it. I see. But what if I do know the source (the print newspaper shown in the video), what do I do in that event? El_C 15:47, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
you've still got it copied onto YouTube with no evidence of permission. — Diannaa (talk) 15:48, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Would I be able to use {{Non-free newspaper image}} for it, even though someone else scanned, edited it into a video, and uploaded it to YouTube? El_C 15:58, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
No, because the video violates someone else's copyright, and is therefore a contributory copyright infringement. WP:COPYLINK— Diannaa (talk) 16:02, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
Understood. Thanks for bearing with me! 🐼 El_C 16:10, 18 November 2021 (UTC)
No problem! Happy to help.— Diannaa (talk) 16:16, 18 November 2021 (UTC)

Re: Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution

Hi, I didn't know about these procedures, thanks for letting me know and explaining everything to me. Greetings. --LukeWiller (talk) 14:50, 20 November 2021 (UTC).

Re: Usage of attribution template

Hello, Thank you for your remark. I have difficulties to follow your instructions. Could you please help me with an example.Charles Inigo (talk) 17:53, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 17:59, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Foreign relations of the United States

Hi, Diannaa, I hope you are well! In early October you removed copyvio from Foreign relations of the United States and provided attribution for other content – for which thank you! I've indeffed that editor, who is now the subject of a WP:CCI request. Anyway, just wondering, did you consciously decide not to revdelete, or did it perhaps just slip your mind? Regards as always, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:05, 20 November 2021 (UTC)

Oh, and if you have a spare moment – which I don't imagine you do – would you care to look at Talk:Eskimo archery? I removed some quotations I thought excessive there, only later noticed that you'd already done some clean-up. Thanks for everything, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:11, 20 November 2021 (UTC)
Hi Justlettersandnumbers, it looks like I just missed doing the revision deletion - the edit is recent so there's no reason not to do it. Done now!
I will also add a comment at Talk:Eskimo archery— Diannaa (talk) 01:14, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Draft Publish

The changes you made to [[3]] are great, and it seems that the article is ready to be published, can you please do that?

Anuraghazra (talk) 19:20, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Ego Is the Enemy

Hi! I noticed that you recently took away some of my edits on my page for Ryan Holiday's book. I definitely understand chapter summaries are a new concept for Wikipedia book pages, as most of them usually have summaries and background about the authors. I decided to include chapter summaries because I felt that it would make the page more worthwhile for readers who are on Wikipedia to research a book. I have also done chapter summaries for another one of Holiday's books, titled "'The Obstacle is the Way". Just thought I would share my thought process and explain why I un-reverted the change. Please feel free to let me know what you think and ask any questions! Coffeeking123 (talk) 22:18, 21 November 2021 (UTC)coffeeking123

There's too much quotation for an encyclopedic style, and the chapter summaries make it read more like a book report than an encyclopedia article.— Diannaa (talk) 23:05, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio on Eagle Street

Hello again, Earwig gives a 95% copyvio warrning on Eagle Street but won't let me see the comparison between the two. Could you please take a look? Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 10:49, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

I have listed it at WP:CP. Thanks for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 11:28, 22 November 2021 (UTC)

Edits to Gun safe

The edits relied on key phrases from an openly distributed Royal Canadian Mounted Police paper pamphlet and referenced website, which expand and amplify terminology in the Firearms Act and its regulations. You'll note the two texts do not align perfectly. Mine has a header sentence and explanatory terminology not in the original. Definitions and key phrases cannot be casually rewritten. In the context of the other Wiki entries, my edit shows the differences between Canada and other countries. For the record, I have been an instructor of the Canadian Firearms Safety Course and a military unit public affairs representative. What I wrote may resemble copywrite material, but that was putting my expression into their Public Affairs voice.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maple leaf eh (talk • contribs)

Sorry but there's too much overlap with this page , which is not compatibly licensed. Please see this report to view the matching content. So we can't keep it. To do so would be a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy.— Diannaa (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
All right then. I've asked the RCMP Canadian Firearms Program about the copyright of their page. We'll see. Maple leaf eh

Copyvio on Interior Board of Land Appeals

Hello again, Earwig is giving Interior Board of Land Appeals a 95% violation warning, I've tagged it but could you take a look please? Best Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 13:06, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

The source webpage is in the public domain and the {{PD-notice}} template is already in place. So no problem.— Diannaa (talk) 13:52, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Diannaa

I greatly apologize for testing this on your talk page but I have an issue with my layout in which new conversations start below the background and borders I have added to my user talk page. I was curious how it worked on yours. While I am here I would be remiss to not take the opportunity to thank you for all your hard work and contributions to the community and the encyclopedia. I have tremendous respect for editors who have been here for a long time and are in good standing regardless of whether I agree with all points they may have on every subject or not. You are an incredible individual. I love the colors I see. --ARoseWolf 18:21, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

It's because you've got table formatting. Just don't close the table and sections will be colored as desired. Note: You can expect a visit from the wiki markup police for not closing the table.— Diannaa (talk) 04:47, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Forgot to say, thatnk you very much for the positive feedback.— Diannaa (talk) 04:52, 25 November 2021 (UTC)


Removal of important content

I noticed you've deleted my edit to Reception and criticism of WhatsApp security and privacy features in such a way that I wasn't even able to recover the content (or link to that edit here). I understand that my edit reused too much text from the Propublica article. Three questions:

1. Do you honestly think Propublica would have any problem with their research being disseminated on Wikipedia, let alone sue for copyright violation?

2. Must you blindly enforce WP:COPY? Hope about a touch of WP:IAR and instead rephrasing my edit to meet your copyright standards?

3. What is more important to you: that this rule not be broken in the article, or for the public to be informed about this extremely important investigation into WhatsApp's questionable practices? -- Mitrel091 (talk) 20:14, 24 November 2021 (UTC)

  1. We don't base our copyright policy decisions on whether or not we think we will get caught.
  2. Sorry but IAR does not apply to our copyright policy, a Wikipedia policy with legal considerations.
  3. There's no reason why our copyright policy has to be violated in order for the public to be informed. Simply summarize the material in your own words.— Diannaa (talk) 04:51, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Hello Diannaa, recently I've been editing the article about Kuttam Pokuna and i have two questions.
The first is about a statement by a previous author: "This page incorporates content...". I don't see any evidence of permission. Furthermore, apart from the intro, no text from this website is left, although there is a number of references pointing to it. Can the statement be removed after I clean up the intro?
The second question is more pressing for me: I found one very interesting source, the most elabrate info about Kuttam Pokuna so far. The only problem is, it refers to the Wikipedia article (as it was in 2018). I don't think this source actually used any of the old Wiki content. There's no explicit reference and there wasn't much there at the time. But you see my problem? --Judithcomm (talk) 10:35, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Please remove the statement after cleaning up the intro. Regarding the academic paper, clicking on the author link it shows it was written by a graduate student at the University of Moratuwa, so that looks like an okay source to me.— Diannaa (talk) 16:31, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! --Judithcomm (talk) 16:55, 25 November 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio The Yukon Regiment

Hello again, there looks like a lot of cut and paste in a new article The Yukon Regiment. I have tagged it but not reverted anything. Could you please take a look? Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 09:14, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

Cleaned. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 16:25, 28 November 2021 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2021

* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:45, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Copy Vio Woodbury Granite Company

Hello again, Earwig is giving big alarms on Woodbury Granite Company for copyvio. I have tagged but not reverted anything. Could you please take a look at this one too? Regards. Hughesdarren (talk) 09:35, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

I have listed at WP:CP. Thank you for reporting— Diannaa (talk) 13:33, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, November 2021

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:25, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Sandy Ridge and Clear Lake Railway edit

I seem to have been contacted for what might seem like a copy and paste from a website without permission. As a member of the railway I felt it was ok to take the info from our website and put it on the page. If that is still not ok I can make an edit to rephrase the information. 174.192.73.94 (talk) 03:13, 2 December 2021 (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. Alternatively, the content would have to be completely re-written in your own words.— Diannaa (talk) 03:41, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

ITER, copyrights

Hi, Diannaa.

Thank you for reminder about copyrights.

I think my contribution to ITER page respects copyrights:

Definition of Q, is scientific knowledge and does not belong to somebody (the same as definition of fusion for example). The text that I wrote is very close to one that we already have on appropriate wiki page Fusion energy gain factor. Also I think it is original (i.e. it does not exactly match to one in other sources). So could you please restore:

One of the ITER objectives is a Q-value ("fusion gain") of 10. Q measures the ratio between the (thermal) power produced by the fusion reactions and the external (thermal) heating power that must be injected in a tokamak (in order to warm up the plasma) to sustain the reactions. With 50 MW input thermal power used for heating plasma it is planned to get output (thermal) power of 500 MW from fusion reactions.

?

Info about Q=10, input (50 MW) and output (500 MW) power of ITER is taken from ITER press releases and so is not protected by copyrights too (as public info).


I also do not think that part

For commercial fusion power stations, engineering gain factor is important. Engineering gain factor takes into consideration all of the plants systems — not just external heating systems, but also secondary systems such as electromagnets, cryogenics plant, diagnostics and control systems — in the evaluation of the input/output power balance of an electricity-producing fusion power plant. Commercial fusion plants will be designed with engineering breakeven in mind.

is copyrights protected. I wrote this text from my head based on previous text of the same ITER page and based on definition of engineering gain factor (that is scientific knowledge too and is also available on Fusion energy gain factor page). So, could you please restore this part too?

In any case, appreciate if you could point exactly text used by me that is copyrights protected with reference to appropriate source and copyrights rules that protect this text (for this case and in the future).

Feel free to contact me if you still have any concerns about my contribution to ITER page. Vasyl Shcherban (talk) 07:49, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Press releases are protected by copyright, just like almost everything else on the Internet, and you can't copy them here. The Fusion energy gain factor page has practically no overlap with your addition, where https://www.iter.org/FAQ has a large overlap. https://www.iter.org/FAQ is marked at the bottom as "© 2021, ITER ORGANIZATION" and the terms of use page states " Documents and materials (collectively "Materials") from the Site are for the User's personal, non-commercial use, without any right to resell or redistribute them or to compile or create derivative works therefrom" which is not a compatible license, because Wikipedia's license allows both commercial use and derivative works. So I will not be restoring anything.— Diannaa (talk) 12:38, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
I've checked one more time - no copyrights protection statement on ITER's press releases. Usually press releases are issued for quoting and referencing by other people (and it is general practice). Figures that I use are just facts from these press releases. If you think they are copyrights protected please specify your source of information. Also these figures are used on the same wiki ITER page in many places.
Yes, https://www.iter.org/FAQ page is copyrights protected, but still it does not imply that definitions of general physics/science terms that they use as Q/fusion gain, Qe/engineering gain, are copyrights protected - you could find them everywhere.
Quote from Fusion_energy_gain_factor page: Q, is the ratio of fusion power produced in a nuclear fusion reactor to the power required to maintain the plasma in steady state
Quote from [1]: The fusion gain factor is defined as the thermal power produced inside the reactor during the fusion reaction divided by the thermal power delivered to the plasma during the operation.
There is big overlap with definition of Q gain factor that I put into article and these definitions as well as one on ITER FAQ page. Just because we talk about general knowledge (that is not copyrights protected).
Well, with regards to "engineering gain factor" (usually denoted as Qe), I am not sure that it is even present on ITER's website at all. I guess they jump directly to "engineering breakeven" in FAQ. From other side you could find that other people uses this term in their scientific works for example in this article (just search "engineering gain factor"): http://homepage.tudelft.nl/20x40/documents/Freidberg.pdf . Also you could find it in book "The Physics of Energy", Robert L. Jaffe, Washington Taylor, 2018 (sorry it is not available online, but probably you could search text in book preview). Book "Plasma Physics and Fusion Energy", Jeffrey P. Freidberg, 2008 (sorry it is not available online, but probably you could search text in book preview). Article https://library.psfc.mit.edu/catalog/online_pubs/MFE_formulary_2014.pdf, page 104, look for "The engineering gain factor" (yes there no wording of definition, but the meaning is the same as I wrote in my statement.
Again it is general knowledge (that is not copyrights protected) used by many people, not just by ITER website. And I think my wording of definition is clear enough.
And, yes, could you please exactly quote statements that you think are copyrights protected? Appreciate your effort, it shouldn't be too complicated. Vasyl Shcherban (talk) 15:21, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/13/9/2157/pdf
The source page is clearly marked as being copyright, tihs is not "general knowledge" but rather copyrightable text that we cannot host on Wikipedia without the consent of the copyright holder, so sorry.
Content I removed:

Q measures the ratio between the (thermal) power produced by the fusion reactions and the external (thermal) heating power that must be injected in a tokamak (in order to warm up the plasma) to sustain the reactions. With 50 MW input thermal power used for heating plasma it is planned to get output (thermal) power of 500 MW from fusion reactions.

For commercial fusion power stations, engineering gain factor is important. Engineering gain factor takes into consideration all of the plants systems — not just external heating systems, but also secondary systems such as electromagnets, cryogenics plant, diagnostics and control systems — in the evaluation of the input/output power balance of an electricity-producing fusion power plant. Commercial fusion plants will be designed with engineering breakeven in mind.

Some nuclear engineers consider a Q of 100 – a hundred-fold energy output – is required for commercial fusion power stations to be viable.

Source says:

Q—also called "fusion gain"—measures the ratio between the power produced by the fusion reactions, and the external heating power that must be injected in a tokamak to sustain the reactions. By producing 500 MW of fusion power from 50 MW of power injected in the systems that heat the plasma—a "gain factor" of 10—ITER will open the way to the next step: a demonstration fusion power plant.

Engineering breakeven would take into consideration all of the plants systems—and not just external heating systems—in the evaluation of the input/output power balance of an electricity-producing fusion power plant. Commercial fusion plants will be designed based on a power balance that accounts for the entire facility: the electricity output, sent to the industrial grid, compared to the electricity consumed by the facility itself—not only in tokamak heating, but also in secondary systems such as the electricity used to power the electromagnets, cool the cryogenics plant, and run diagnostics and control systems.

— Diannaa (talk) 21:56, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

As I explained, it is general knowledge that is present in many sources (and I provided example of these other sources). Anybody could use it including iter.org and wikipedia.org. The point that somebody in copyright protected article uses general knowledge (as definition of science terms) does not make it copyright protected. Could you point where I could escalate this question?
In any case, I am going to rephrase my sentences a bit and put it back into the article. Vasyl Shcherban (talk) 13:00, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
You might consider asking at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems or consider asking one of the admins listed here.— Diannaa (talk) 21:20, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
I'd like to use as the second part following text (the first part is already well reflected in the lead and background parts of the article):

For commercial fusion power stations, engineering gain factor is important. Engineering gain factor is defined as the ratio of a plant electrical power output to electrical power input of all plant's internal systems (tokamak external heating systems, electromagnets, cryogenics plant, diagnostics and control systems, etc.). Commercial fusion plants will be designed with engineering breakeven in mind.

Do you have any objections?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Vasyl Shcherban (talk • contribs)
That version looks okay from a copyright point of view.— Diannaa (talk) 22:40, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Royal Commission into Joshua Arthur

Thanks for picking up that I had forgotten to include the attribution statement in Royal Commission into Joshua Arthur. I reverted your edit as the easiest way to restore the large number of links removed as it was not clear to me why that was done, and converting the category to text suggests it may have been unintentional. If there is some particular reason for removing the links I'm happy to discuss. I have of course kept the attribution statement. Cheers --Find bruce (talk) 22:10, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

The links were removed by accident, likely by accidentally clicking the "general formatting" or "delink common terms" in the menu on the left of my screen. Sorry for the mistake, and sorry for not noticing and saving a crappy edit.— Diannaa (talk) 21:22, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
No worries - no need to apologise as the only reason you went there was to fix my mistake. I remembered your kind & helpful comment from 2016 & so only came here to make sure there wasn't something else I was missing. --Find bruce (talk) 22:17, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Seeking your opinion on India League (1928 Institute)

Hi Diannaa. I hope you're well. When you have time, I'd appreciate your opinion on India League (1928 Institute). A minority portion of the text is copied word-for-word from a source, but then a decent proportion of the non-copyvio content is closely paraphrased from that same source (without attribution). Does the latter constitute a copyright violation in and of itself, on top of the directly copied text? Cordless Larry (talk) 22:32, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Just pinging Jimfbleak, who deleted a previous copyright violation at India League. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:55, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
The article can likely be saved, but I don't have time/interest to clean it right now. So I have listed it at WP:CP. Thanks for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 21:28, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Diannaa. The topic is notable and interesting, so it would be good to try to save the article, but it's completely understandable that you don't have the time to do that. I mostly just wanted your opinion on what to do, which I now have. Thanks! Cordless Larry (talk) 21:32, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Gleneagles Hospital Penang

Hi Diannaa. Would you mind checking Gleneagles Hospital Penang for copyvios. It recently underwent a major expansion by a possible COI/Paid editor and lots of the new content seems rather promotional. Some of what I removed also seem as if it was taken verbatim from the hospital's website or from some of its other promotional materials. I've already asked about this at WT:HOSPITAL, but that was before I noticed there might also be a copyvio issue. The same editor has also been working on a number of drafts for hospitals which means they might have the same problem. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:16, 2 December 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Gleneagles Hospital Medini Johor is draft submitted by the same editor which was declined by an AfC reviewer as a copyright violation. Perhaps you could look at this one as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:40, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
I will look at these later, I have to go to the gym etc now. Thanks for reporting,— Diannaa (talk) 21:29, 3 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for feedback (Women in Tanzania)

Hey Dianna, thank you for your feedback on my changes on the "Women in Tanzania" article and the tipps you send me; I'm obviously new at this and will pay more attention with the next changes I'll make. Have a good day!

Katja0610 (talk) 17:14, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Edit-warring student editor at Ancient Hawaii adding and re-adding copyvio content

Hi Diannaa, I've been having trouble with a student editor, 808desiree808, who insists on adding and re-adding copyvio content to the article. He added copyvio content copied-and-pasted from The American Heritage Guide to Contemporary Usage and Style with this edit and from this website with this edit.

To give you an idea of the general quality of his editing apart from copyvio edits, here's a sample of text he added here: "When things seem to be going well Captain James Cook arrived in 1778 bringing down the Hawai’ian population to almost extinct the arrival of Cook he not only brought devastation to the local people but he brought dieases such as small pox, measles, sexually transmitted dieases, influenza and whooping cough,Leaving the hawai’ians at just 40,000, Almost making their language and culture extinct as well." Carlstak (talk) 02:13, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Update: (Wiki Ed) has revdel'd the copyvio revisions. Thanks anyway. Regards, Carlstak (talk) 04:43, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

Ringless voicemail edit.

Hello Diannaa.

Perhaps if I explain myself and what Im trying to do, you might be able to point me in the right direction so that my edit is not removed over and over.

I now understand that part of my posting was not original, but just a copy & paste from the two links on the CRTC website. I was not trying to plagiarize, but only showing highlights as a summary from the two weblinks I had posted.

Ringless Voicemail is an actual service. It was created by myself in 1997. Then Bell Canada objected to my practices and I was taken to the CRTC (Canada Radio-tv Telecommunications Commission), where a court room/trial took place. CRTC agreed that ringless voicemail would be allowed in Canada. As such I would like to update the "status" of this legal marketing service available in Canada, which is offered by only a few service providers.

My SEO person had successfully created this new section in 2018. But the web link she posted was no longer active. So I tried to update with a new link from the CRTC website, but you removed it.

Currently your one line comment that "In Canada, the CRTC allows voice mail messages that do not interrupt the person's activities in real-time", this does not relate to the subject of Ringless Voicemail, and has nothing to do with it. How can you update this subject with a completely unrelated commentary??

Anyway, Those last two links I provided which are links to the CRTC website, they explain the current legality with Ringless Voicemail, and how it arrived to be legal service in Canada. Why will you not allow them to be listed to explain clearly to the public how Ringless Voicemail came to be?

As you stated, Im not trying to make this forum my "mouth piece". I am only trying to update this subject with historical and factual information on a communications service which is recognized and legalized by the government of Canada. Yes, and it just so happens that I was the first one who created it.

I am asking that you please give me your guidance, so to avoid being edited again.

Thank you Diannaa.

(I hope Im using this talk page correctly)

cesar. Cesar correia (talk) 20:22, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

I've been watching the ringless voicemail page for some time. People from various companies have tried to use that page to promote their own companies and services, usually via stealth advertising. Cesar correia (a person of questionable character) is simply the latest person to attempt to do so, plugging for the company he owns a 34% stake in, Infolink Technologies, Ltd. Because he has an obvious conflict of interest, I recommend blocking him from editing that page entirely. Furthermore, in the interest of neutrality, it is probably best that we avoid any mention of any companies that offer the service, whether that is in passing reference to court cases or citing their own advertisements or promotional web pages. This is why I removed the mention of infolink and simply pointed to the CRTC interpretation directly. I also feel there should be some kind of global keword block for some of these companies that have a long history of plugging their own websites in citations, but I have no idea how that process works or the rules for it. 97.124.152.48 (talk) 21:50, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
@Cesar correia:, There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot copy from the CRTC website, because it's copyright. A second problem is conflict of interest. Writing or editing an article about your own organisation or products 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.
The content "In Canada, the CRTC allows voice mail messages that do not interrupt the person's activities in real-time" was there when I arrived at the page. I did not add it. If you think it should be removed, you could open a discussion on the article talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 22:36, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

December 2021 GOCE Newsletter

Guild of Copy Editors December 2021 Newsletter

Hello and welcome to the December GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since September 2021.

                 Current and upcoming events

Election time: Our end-of-year election of coordinators opened for nominations on 1 December and will close on 15 December at 23:59 (UTC). Voting opens at 00:01 the following day and will continue until 31 December at 23:59, just before "Auld Lang Syne". Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here.

December Blitz: We have scheduled a week-long copy-editing blitz for 12 to 18 December. Sign up now!

Drive and Blitz reports

September Drive: Almost 400,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 27 people who signed up, 21 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here.

October Blitz: From 17 to 23 October, we copy edited articles tagged in May and June 2021 and requests. 8 participating editors completed 26 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here.

November Drive: Over 350,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 21 people who signed up, 14 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here.

Other news

It is with great sadness that we report the death on 19 November of Twofingered Typist, who was active with the Guild almost daily for the past several years. His contributions long exceeded the thresholds for the Guild's highest awards, and he had a hand in innumerable good and featured article promotions as a willing collaborator. Twofingered Typist also served as a Guild coordinator from July 2019 to June 2021. He is sorely missed by the Wikipedia community.

Progress report: As of 30 November, GOCE copyeditors have completed 619 requests in 2021 and there were 51 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog stood at 946 articles tagged for copy-editing (see monthly progress graph above).

Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis.

To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list.

Distributed via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Tech News: 2021-49

Latest tech news from the Wikimedia technical community. Please tell other users about these changes. Not all changes will affect you. Translations are available.

Problems

  • MediaWiki 1.38-wmf.11 was scheduled to be deployed on some wikis last week. The deployment was delayed because of unexpected problems.

Changes later this week

  • Recurrent item The new version of MediaWiki will be on test wikis and MediaWiki.org from 7 December. It will be on non-Wikipedia wikis and some Wikipedias from 8 December. It will be on all wikis from 9 December (calendar).
  • At all Wikipedias, a Mentor Dashboard is now available at Special:MentorDashboard. It allows registered mentors, who take care of newcomers' first steps, to monitor their assigned newcomers' activity. It is part of the Growth features. You can learn more about activating the mentor list on your wiki and about the mentor dashboard project.
  • Advanced item The predecessor to the current MediaWiki Action API (which was created in 2008), action=ajax, will be removed this week. Any scripts or bots using it will need to switch to the corresponding API module. [4]
  • Advanced item An old ResourceLoader module, jquery.jStorage, which was deprecated in 2016, will be removed this week. Any scripts or bots using it will need to switch to mediawiki.storage instead. [5]

Tech news prepared by Tech News writers and posted by bot • Contribute • Translate • Get help • Give feedback • Subscribe or unsubscribe.

21:57, 6 December 2021 (UTC)

Administrators will no longer be autopatrolled

A recently closed Request for Comment (RFC) reached consensus to remove Autopatrolled from the administrator user group. You may, similarly as with Edit Filter Manager, choose to self-assign this permission to yourself. This will be implemented the week of December 13th, but if you wish to self-assign you may do so now. To find out when the change has gone live or if you have any questions please visit the Administrator's Noticeboard. 20:05, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

It is clear that GREATER HAMILTON. Freecall. has copied content from Wikipedia not the other way around (they didn't even remove the parenthesis that surrounded the dates!). Suggest you reverse your edits concerning copyright violation.

Text from Hamilton, Victoria - Wikipedia added 19JAN2011 Hamilton Art Galleryis world-renowned and one of the major regional collections in Victoria. Its collections spans Australian and European paintings and decorative arts and Chinese, Japanese and Korean decorative arts, with the majority being 18th century or later. In particular the Gallery holds 22 gouache by English painter Paul Sandby (1731-1809), second only to the holding of the Queen.

Edit to wikipedia on 23 May 1916 Hamilton Gallery Established in 1961, Hamilton Gallery’s renowned collection features a decorative arts focus (well over half of its collection) of both Australian and International objects from the 17th century through to the present. Asian art and Australian paintings and prints are strongly represented but the Gallery is perhaps most well-known for its rare collection of gouache and watercolour pictures by Paul Sandby (1731-1809).

Text from GREATER HAMILTON. Freecall.

Established in 1961, Hamilton Gallery s renowned collection features a decorative arts focus (well over half of its collection) of both Australian and International objects from the 17th century through to the present. Asian art and Australian paintings and prints are strongly represented but the Gallery is perhaps most well known for its rare collection of gouache and watercolour pictures by Paul Sandby ( ) depicting the English landscape. 

   regards
           Richard Bruce Bradford (talk) 05:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
The content in Hamilton, Victoria was altered to the version that matches http://docplayer.net/45659789-Greater-hamilton-freecall.html by someone self-identifying as "Hg hamilton" (ie, Hamilton Gallery). It was their only edit to Wikipedia. (Diff of Hamilton, Victoria). While the document at http://docplayer.net/45659789-Greater-hamilton-freecall.html is dated Autumn/Winter 2017, which is later than the date it was added to Wikipedia, it's very likely that the art gallery supplied the text both to Wikipedia and to the brochure. — Diannaa (talk) 14:27, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

user Faze Tome adding copyvio content to WP

Hi Diannaa, user Faze Tome, has added copyvio content to the Santa Barbara, California article that has been reverted, and in draft pages they've created, too. These need to be revdel'ed. Thanks, Carlstak (talk) 12:52, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I think I got the draft cleaned. If you could check— Diannaa (talk) 14:36, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Diannaa. The one sentence that was left paraphrased the source too closely so I shortened it. Carlstak (talk) 12:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Milwaukee shoulder syndrome

Hi, and thanks for your input on the above article. Would you happen to have a link to the WP instructions regarding the attribution I left out? I'd like to get current on this. Thanks.--Quisqualis (talk) 18:00, 8 December 2021 (UTC)


Rachel Griffith

I saw you deleted my distributions, however, all the sources I used are provided by my professor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Suisheng (talk • contribs) 03:17, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Your sources are a source of information, not of prose. Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia.— Diannaa (talk) 03:54, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Tomaz

Hi! I noticed that you edited the Eurojust page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurojust) recently. May I kindly ask you to replace the outdated Eurojust logo currently on the Wikipedia page with the new Eurojust logo (adopted in 2019), as documented here: https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/media-and-events/media-kit. For example, a full color Eurojust logo is available here: https://www.eurojust.europa.eu/sites/default/files/Mediakit/Logos/Eurojust-Logo_FullColor-CMYK.png Many thanks and keep up the good work! Kind regards, Tomaz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.166.34.242 (talk) 16:24, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

Okay, will do, after I get back from shopping etc— Diannaa (talk) 16:35, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
Done— Diannaa (talk) 00:45, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Fort Shirley

Hi, a noticed that this article has a lot of text from this 2010 journal, so I assume the journal article came first. This is not a new addition, so just leaving a note here if can take a look when you get a chance. It looks like the text has been in the article for 10 years, so I thought it would be best to leave this one entirely to you. Thanks. MB 18:13, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

This version pinpoints the publication date as July 22, 2010, and the content was added to Wikipedia on May 4, 2011. I will list it at WP:CP to give interested editors the opportunity to do a rewrite. Thanks for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 00:59, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio?

Hello D. I hope you are well. In the past adding the list of films at The Great Movies (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) have been deleted as a copyvio so I thought I'd make you aware of this edit. I don't know if putting them in a table sourced to Ebert's website changes things or not. If it doesn't you should also be aware that the table was created in a sandbox. Thanks for your time and I hope you have a delightful holiday season :-) MarnetteD|Talk 19:20, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

I've done revision deletion at both locations and alerted the user as to why. Seasons greetings— Diannaa (talk) 01:17, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for checking on this - much appreciated. MarnetteD|Talk 02:13, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Removal of block quote

Dear Diannaa, thank you for your feedback on Nov.20 on my Wikipedia article "Autism in China"! (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_in_China). But I wish to respectfully say that I am quite curious about why my block quote was deleted. I did use a block quote under the "Diagnosis Procedure" as the following. Is it because the use of this block quote is too long, or since it's for explaining purpose as opposed to summarizing?

Thanks! --Ha.susulat (talk) 04:28, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

My edit summary shows "remove copyright content copied from http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10803-012-1722-6". All adding a block quote does is indent your post a little bit, and particularily when you are copying a numbered list, it does not make it obvious to our readers (who unlike experienced Wikipedians, will never have heard of a block quote or understand its meaning) that it's a quotation rather than prose you wrote yourself. For this reason, it did not seem to me to be enough to negate the fact that you copy-pasted copyright content directly from your source. — Diannaa (talk) 05:27, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

I see, we want to make sure everyday readers (without knowledge on Wikipedia formatting) understand the Wikipedia formats and what are the quotes too... Thank you for the clear explanation, Diannaa! --Ha.susulat (talk) 19:29, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Max Caulfield

Greetings. Could you check out the deleted version of this article? This seems to be a very well-done article for a brand new user, with this being their first contribution. Since this article has a history of sock activity, it raises my suspicions. Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 11:39, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi onel5969. The article does not match the deleted version or the version at Fandom. The copypatrol bot did not pick it up as copyvio, and Earwig's tool shows nothing.— Diannaa (talk) 13:18, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for a taking a look. Onel5969 TT me 13:28, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Charaxes pollux and other charaxes edits

The problem here is that we all use the same few sources.However I did take a shortcut by using Mark Willams Metamorphis site.I will go back over all my recent charaxes edits replacing the borrowed text (mea culpa) with "Information on the biology of this species is given by Larsen, Kielland Pringle etc" with the appropriate ref.Thankyou for the warning I should have anticipated.Best regards Notafly (talk) 11:42, 10 December 2021 (UTC) Is this ok with you?

Sounds okay. Note that we have a bot that looks for copyvio, please be aware and be diligent in not copying directly from your sources in the future.— Diannaa (talk) 13:20, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Oaxaca en la historia y en el mito

I'm not sure whether you get involved in copyright issues on Commons. All the files in this article are under discussion at Commons in order to seek to determine whether they are allowed there. If they are not allowed there I am unsure whether they might be allowed under one of the exemptions here. I know the creating editor will be grateful for all possible advice. Anything you feel able to contribute to the conversation, probably in the deletion discussions at commons, will be well received. FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 11:26, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

LGBT parenting

Did you just copyright stroke a scientific paper??? Now, this calls for an arbitration committee. SAGE journals citations ARE NOT copyright material, now this is a blatant attempt at censorship. Not to mention, you deleted a whole edit, not just one link. I am bringing it back and filling for arbitration. My edits were made according to citation guidelines of Wikipedia. You had no right to DELETE my work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Scientific_citation_guidelines Platyna (talk) 14:23, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
The source paper is marked as "© Catholic Medical Association 2016", so to copypaste from that source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. I am perfectly well, thanks, but to question people's health when they do something you don't like will not get you far on this website. — Diannaa (talk) 14:31, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Because? Do you understand that Linacre is one of the colleges at Oxford University? And Linacre Q is a SCOPUS/Web of Science indexed journal, oldest and well respected journal about the bioethics AND this was a literature review quoting numerous other studies AND you deleted a whole edit with ALL references not only from Linacre Q? Are you now going to run through all the Wikipedia articles referencing research done in Jesus College in Cambridge, or what? What you did is a vandalism, I am filling for arbitration. Platyna (talk) 14:54, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
@Platyna: Referencing reputable journals is of course fine. Copying the text of those papers into Wikipedia is not and is a copyright concern. Please take a look at Wikipedia's copyright policy -- Wikipedia is under a Creative Commons license that guarantees all content to be free to use, so we can't accept material under copyright by other parties (in this case the Catholic Medical Association). If you wish to restore the info please paraphrase and write it in your own words instead. eviolite (talk) 15:36, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
I didn't COPY I cited a few short sentences (like 2 or 3), this is how you CITE things, I put it under quotation marks, you could talk to me and request a redaction instead of erasing all traces of my work, so I couldn't even improve it. I am still waiting for you to elaborate why a journal that one of the editing party has "Catholic" in their name is against copyright. I went through your other edits, let's play open cards, it is not about citations, it is about the research that found out things you don't like. Anyway, I filled a complaint here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case#Very_brief_and_neutral_name_describing_the_topic_of_the_dispute — Preceding unsigned comment added by Platyna (talk • contribs) 15:46, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
First off, I am not Diannaa; I just came to this talk page seeing the arbitration case and have some experience regarding copyright. According to the report Diannaa linked in her edit summary removing the text from LGBT parenting, you copied the exact wording of several sentences, including one starting "In a 2015 study", without quotes. (Even if it were quoted, that would be unnecessary: one example of overuse is when quotations are used to explain a point that can be paraphrased.) No matter what source it came from, that is unacceptable; the deletion has nothing to do with Catholicism but rather that the text is copyrighted (which is what the copyright notice shows). Proper citation on Wikipedia does not involve any direct copying, but rather paraphrasing information and putting an inline citation to the original source; see the guide on referencing.
Deleting revisions that violate the copyright policy is standard; see the revision deletion policy. Again, this has nothing to do with the content or topic of the edit, just that it introduced copyrighted material into Wikipedia. eviolite (talk) 16:02, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
BTW I am an academic teacher I am well-trained about fair use and IP. And YOU CAN use fragments for citation, review or educational purposes, there is no single country that forbids it, heck Wikipedia citation guidelines also do not forbid it. I did it on purpose, so I cannot be accused that I changed the meaning of the original work. Yet still, you also removed things besides quotes, and then you removed several other references. So let's be frank, we know what it is all about. A peer reviewed WoS/SCOPUS indexed journal is as trustworthy as any other peer reviewed WoS/SCOPUS indexed journal, it doesn't matter who is one of the publishing parties, it can be even KKK or Jimmy the Clown. Not to mention that the author is an MD specialized in psychiatry and family medicine, and his works, including books are published by APA, there is no way you can undermine the journal's or the author's credibility. What you did is a pure vandalism. Platyna (talk) 15:59, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Platyna, it doesn't matter if you are the emperor of China, in this project we follow this policy. Copyright violations are removed whenever and wherever they are found; it is our standard practice to revert any edit that added them. There's nothing to stop you adding back the non-violating parts of your edit (though it looks as if you should establish talk-page consensus before doing so). Please do not level baseless accusations of vandalism against any editor. Thanks, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:03, 11 December 2021 (UTC)
Platyna wow. I have only been on Wikipedia for two weeks and even I know “You have no right to delete my work” is not how things work here. The highly experienced editors and admins here will catch errors and try to help you fix them. It is our job to learn from the experienced people not yell at them and question their sanity. I also had a scholarly article removed from my contribution due to copyright. I think it is important we learn from those with experience rather than just bite them for trying to help - Such-change47 (talk) 12:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Emin Duraku

Hi Diannaa, please can you revdel a copvio from by an IP at Emin Duraku.

Done. Thank you for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 16:50, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Hi there. I am contacting as I have got the impression that you frequently deal with copyright violations in articles. These additions in [6] seem to be have been copied largely one-to-one from the references. I think I've trimmed the most offending parts in this change: [7] I have also informed the contributor in question on their Talk page: User talk:Allmodcons1978

Could you please check whether the revision needs to be deleted and perhaps inform the user in a more formal way? Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

I have done the required revision deletion. Your warning is good; nothing further is needed at present in my opinion. Please let me know if the problem continues.— Diannaa (talk) 22:33, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, Diannaa. :-) Robby.is.on (talk) 22:49, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Corruption in Bangladesh

Hi there,

I write my own sentence then provide references. Have you cross-checked with the source? Its not the copy/paste. Please double check. It took me two hours to research before writing the four sentences.

Thanks Canberra2021 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 23:56, 12 December 2021 (UTC)

Results of double check: Content I removed is a match for that found in the three sources mentioned in my two edit summaries.— Diannaa (talk) 00:39, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail! The subject is Urgent.
Message added 00:09, 13 December 2021 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

BilCat (talk) 00:09, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Replied. Thanks.— Diannaa (talk) 00:31, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
You're most welcome. BilCat (talk) 00:36, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
The oversight team has already responded, so please feel free to contact them if I am not around, for fast service. They can do rev-del or oversight both – whatever is required.— Diannaa (talk) 00:49, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Second this. If anything people underestimate what should be suppressed on the libel front, so if anything is RD2 or RD3 involving a BLP, and you don't see an admin who is active, please send it in since we can assess whether something should be suppressed or revdel'd and do either. (Not sure what this specific query was in relation to, but thought I'd +1 Diannaa's response.) TonyBallioni (talk) 01:18, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Tony. It wasn't BLP in this case, but I have run across those issues in the past. I usually prefer dealing directly with admins that I know, such as Diannaa, but have sent things to the Oversight team a couple of times. Thanks for the reminder. BilCat (talk) 02:09, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Copy vio

Environmental policy of the Joe Biden administration

The information that I added re the Biden infrastructure bill was removed instantly so that it is hard to believe that you even read it. I don't believe it was a copy vio and I have no idea how I can add for example what structures money was to go for other than put it in the article. I need to see the copy so that I can make whatever adjustments you believe I need to make. Sectionworker (talk) 14:44, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. My initial visit to the page was triggered when our CopyPatrol system detected a problem. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found.
Since you already had one warning on your talk page, I looked further using Earwig's tool, and found additional violations of our copyright policy. Altogether, I removed about 350 words of copyright content copied from the following six web pages:

I see you are formerly Gandydancer, and there's five additional copyright warnings/notices at User talk:Gandydancer. I am placing a final warning on your (new) user talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 15:11, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I had a serious accident and was unable to type for a long time and I also lost my computer with my Gandydancer password. I have been here for over 15 years and have made thousands of edits. I am doing the best I can do since I hate to get a copy vio warning and I try very hard to avoid it. Since I had that many violations on the Biden page alone it is clear that I will soon make another since as I said, I'm already doing my best. It is hard and sad for me to have to quit editing rather than be barred from editing, which would be bound to happen. Sectionworker (talk) 17:46, 13 December 2021 (UTC)

Folk poetry collected by folklorists

Can you explain in what way a folk poem collected by a folklorist is of "uncertain copyright status"? This is a poem that is reported to have existed before any Swedish copyright laws.--Berig (talk) 08:55, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

The folk poem would be public domain, but the translation might be copyright. We don't know.— Diannaa (talk) 15:10, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
I did the translation on my own, a long time ago.--Berig (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
If you would like to re-add it and include a note in your edit summary to that effect that would be okay.— Diannaa (talk)

Ajj Aakhaan Waris Shah Nu

I translated the lyrics myself, I’m not sure why you deleted them with an explanation about copyright? Could you please explain why they were deleted or restore them?

Thank you in advance HoneyBuns51 (talk) 18:52, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

The exact same version was previously published online, at http://sikhsindia.blogspot.com/2012_12_01_archive.html, https://www.poetrynook.com/poem/i-ask-waris-shah-today, and elsewhere. So I have trouble believing that you translated the work yourself.— Diannaa (talk) 23:41, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki-psyc | Gaslighting Article | Wholesale deletion

Dianna, I'm upset with what was done to my edits. I hope you will revert them immediately. If you take a deeper dive you will see that I have been fixing a deeply flawed article with context, rewriting plagiarism, and replacing junk sources. This is what I started with in July: link to article

I'm not a Wikipedia regular, I'm an expert that comes online at times to correct really problematic psychology articles.

I've made 80 edits, added 11,770 bytes, removed 31,144. I have run plagiarism checks on it and worked to clean up the plagiarism. I have gone through the citations and replaced weak RS with more reputable ones. I have stripped out the well intentioned psychobabble and reworded things to be understandable and accurate for professionals and casual readers.

Today, I spend 5 hours running a plagiarism checker on the first third of the articles and copy editing the existing text. I can't understand why you would just wipe it out these simple copy edits in the name of plagiarism?

I stay out of the wiki-drama, no matter how hard I'm baited, and I walk away when editors get into it. It's already to time intensive to edit here without the drama.

If this is about the photos: I assumed that photos on Wikimedia were fair game. If that's not that case, then please tell me what I need to look for to determine which photos can be used.

If this is about copying text from another article - if you look closer, I actually rewrote and found difference sources because of the errors. And I made note of the transfer as per the advice given to me by another admin.

With all that goes on here, its getting hard to justify investing time. If we can't get this resolved, this will be the last straw for me - not because of you - but the drama overall. There has to be a more constructive way to educate editors than blunt force - removing the work from sight so that everything has to be done over from scratch. Wiki-psyc (talk) 00:36, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

I am a little baffled by your post, as I have never edited the Gaslighting article or performed any logged actions there. Perhaps you are referring to Narcissism, where I recently removed a short passage (66 words) copied from https://books.google.ca/books?id=mZ5eX44E9lYC&pg=PA340? If so, this is hardly wholesale deletion and does not wipe out your many hours of work. — Diannaa (talk) 02:08, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Twenty-two (22) edit entries over a 2 day period (see below) were deleted and blocked from view so that I can no longer see them - 5 hours of work on a project I have worked on for six months. Many of these edits are labeled "Copy editing - no content changes". I was clearly in the process of cleaning up grammar and rewording things that were showing up on plagiarism checker from other editors. Can you restore these edits? And can you be so very kind to give me a searchable snippet from the 66 words you removed so I can relocate the text and rework it - its not at the link you posted. I'd really like to finish this work before I sunset my membership. I'm not going to go back an redo the work from scratch - I'm just going to move on. This should be a more collegial environment.
14:38, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 40,381 bytes +32‎ Copy editing - no content changes
14:35, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 40,349 bytes −17‎ →‎Etymology: Copy editing - no content changes
14:29, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 40,366 bytes −132‎ Copy editing - no content changes
07:27, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 40,498 bytes −72‎ Removed source - not reputable.
07:16, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 40,570 bytes +91‎ →‎Normalization of narcissistic behaviors: rewrite photo caption
07:08, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 40,479 bytes +46‎ Added photo to "Normalization of narcissistic behaviors"
06:49, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 40,433 bytes +5‎ →‎Impact on evolution: Retitled → Narcissism and evolution
06:47, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ m 40,428 bytes −1,014‎ →‎The normalization of narcissistic behaviors in society
06:46, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 41,442 bytes +24‎ →‎Narcissistic trends in society: Retitled →The normalization of narcissistic behaviors in society
06:35, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 41,418 bytes −37‎ →‎Examples of narcissistic behaviors: Retitled to "Expressions of narcissism"
06:03, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 41,455 bytes 0‎ Added — Category:1889 introductions | Removed → Category:1914 introductions
05:58, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 41,455 bytes −24‎ Moved Category:Dark triad to Narcissistic Personality Disorder
05:54, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 41,479 bytes −4,135‎ Moved "In popular culture" to "Narcissist Personality Disorder" article as they are examples of Narcissist Personality Disorder, not narcissism per se. This article has a detailed section of "Examples"
00:58, 15 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 45,614 bytes +36‎ →‎Characteristics: add subtitle → Healthy levels of narcissism
21:50, 14 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 45,578 bytes −45‎ →‎In popular culture: Removed link to list
21:47, 14 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 45,623 bytes +363‎ Added Freud image
21:33, 14 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 45,260 bytes +92‎ Added File:Antonio Zanchi - Sisyphus - more consistent with Caravaggio image.
21:16, 14 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 45,168 bytes −42‎ Narcissism | state =expand correction
20:01, 14 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 45,210 bytes −1‎ Spelling and grammar edit
19:53, 14 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 45,211 bytes −624‎ →‎Etymology: clean up - removed duplicate copy
19:51, 14 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 45,835 bytes −49‎ →‎Etymology: grammar
19:50, 14 December 2021‎ Wiki-psyc ‎ 45,884 bytes +1,244‎ →‎Etymology: addition content
Wiki-psyc (talk) 03:52, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
The edits were not deleted, they were hidden from view to remove the copyright content from the page history. The revisions containing the copyright material were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. You can see by viewing this Diff of Narcissism that the remainder of your edits were untouched. You can also see by viewing the edit history that I only removed 601 bytes of text. You can compare this with the material at the CopyPatrol report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found. Some of the content not highlighted in the iThenticate link appears both in the book and in the content I removed. Your version was in a bulleted list, and the book has the same content in prose form.— Diannaa (talk) 04:52, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate the explanation. No one is questioning the copyright issue. The way this was initially handled was not constructive nor did it assume good faith. Twenty edits were blocked from view and there was no reasonable alternative way to know what was the issue, nor was there a reasonable way to resolve it. Policy doesn't make it right. A lighter hand would benefit everyone. I appreciate your response, though, and your sorting this out. Wiki-psyc (talk) 16:00, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Schindler's List

Hi, the Schindler's Ark article was changed to non-fiction novel on 27 November 2021 - previously it was listed for years as historical fiction. Denisarona (talk) 07:48, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

I think non-fiction novel is a better fit, because it uses actual people and actual events.— Diannaa (talk) 13:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio with foreign language sources

Hi Diannaa, is there some Wikipedia guidance about not copying translations of foreign language sources into Wikipedia? I know it should be obvious, but copyright rules are rarely obvious. TSventon (talk) 09:04, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

I would need to see an example to answer your question precisely. If a source is copyright, the translation is copyright too. If the source is PD, the translation might be copyright if it was done within the span of normal copyright protection, as it is a derivative work, ie. each translator would come up with a unique translation, containing enough creativity to enjoy copyright protection..— Diannaa (talk) 13:56, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
The context is that I saw the comment "no copyvio as sources are in German" as a comment on a Did You Know check. User:Paradise Chronicle explained that, but I wanted to find whether there was general guidance on including editors' own translations of copyright material in a foreign language in articles. TSventon (talk) 14:38, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
I found info at Wikipedia:FAQ/Copyright#Derivative works and Wikipedia:Plagiarism#Translating. The latter sums it up quite well:

If the source is in a language other than English, the contributor may be under the mistaken belief that the act of translation is a sufficient revision to eliminate concerns of plagiarism. On the contrary, regardless of whether the work is free, the obligation remains to give credit to authors of foreign language texts for their creative expression, information and ideas, and, if the work is unfree, direct translation is likely to be a copyright violation as well.

— Diannaa (talk) 14:54, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, DiannaaParadise Chronicle (talk) 02:17, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, Diannaa, I was having problems finding the detail. TSventon (talk) 11:38, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Io, Saturnalia!

Io, Saturnalia!
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth (talk) 14:49, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Greetings and thank you!— Diannaa (talk) 14:55, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Copyvio after final warning

Hi Diannaa, I saw that you gave a final warning on December 4 to JonesJaguar here: User talk:JonesJaguar#December 2021. Unfortunately I have just removed more copyvio that they added today at American kestrel (CopyPatrol) and Proboscis bat. DanCherek (talk) 17:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

@DanCherek I've blocked and left an explanatory rationale. Moneytrees🎄Talk/CCI guide 18:40, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks to you both.— Diannaa (talk) 22:15, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Potential copyvio

Hi Diannaa. This edit seems like it was copy-pasted from an outside source. Unfortunately I am not able to say from which source. Some of it may be from this press release. As you have dealt with this editor's copyvio previously, maybe you can take a look of it. Beagel (talk) 08:32, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 15:51, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Two short copyvios

Hi again, I have reverted two edits with information copied from a Guardian article and warned the editor.

These are done. Thanks for your interest in copyright cleanup.— Diannaa (talk) 15:53, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Referencing quote

Hi Diannaa, I was wandering, how much of a copyright text can be directly copied with attribution please? None? Or just a sentence? Are direct quotes from newspapers etc permitted provided they are short and attributed? I’m worried about adding content in future like this because the very last thing I want is an official warning or block. So will be treading super carefully. Thank you. - Such-change47 (talk) 12:24, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

What we're supposed to do is use only short quotations, and only if there's no alternative. There's no set limit on the size or number of quotations. That said, Wikipedia articles should for the most part be written in our own words, and quotations used only when absolutely necessary. For a book, it would be more appropriate to provide a few short excerpts (one or two sentences) from reviews rather than extensive quotations from the book itself or from an interview with the author. Wikipedia:Non-free content#Text says "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea"; "Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited." Please see Wikipedia:Non-free content, especially Wikipedia:Non-free content#Text, and the essay Wikipedia:Quotations for more details.— Diannaa (talk) 15:51, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! :) Such-change47 (talk) 04:38, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
@Diannaa: absolute final question I promise, I recall reading you a comment from you somewhere on the copyright of Australian court decisions? It appears that Federal court does not have any copyright. NSW Supreme Court is Creative commons, does that mean it's okay to use here? If you have a list for australian courts and copyright status, and also whether australian legislation is copyright, please could you share here so I have it for future reference, - cheers, and thank you so much for all the help you have given me - Such-change47 (talk) 04:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
It's incorrect to say that the Australian Federal Court documents don't have any copyright. In all countries that are signatories to the Berne Convention, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright until proven otherwise. Many documents issued by Australian govt and courts are released under a compatible CC-by license, but many are not, so we should not generalize. Check each source document carefully for copyright/license information, and if you can't prove a document is compatibly licensed, you ahve to assume that it is not.— Diannaa (talk) 15:37, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

WP Cyclones CCI

Hi, Diannaa; thanks for the excellent help with Such-change47’s work at FAR. I am once again reminded of my own inexperience.

I am aware that Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/WikiProject Tropical cyclones is an enormous undertaking for the few editors who work at CCI, and am attempting to help by at least reviewing the FAs as they come up at FAC, FAR and WP:URFA/2020. Because of all the copying within and public domain sources, and the high number of hurricane FAs, the work is quite time consuming. I have also encountered instances in the past where Earwig fails to detect copyvio towards the end of a FAC because of extensive interim copyediting that occurs during a GA or FAC review, so there is a need to check older versions. I am still trying to develop a methodology and format (hoping others in the FA review processes will follow suit).

I now have questions about my work spread all over creation, and don’t feel confident to move forward on others at URFA without more feedback. Would it be OK with you (that is, do you have the time) if we kept a thread open here where I could post my Dummies 101 questions? Work at FAR is at a deliberately slow pace, so there is no urgency, but I have several reviews stalled now, awaiting checks on my methodology. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

I don't think that's going to work for me, Sandy, because it would likely reduce the number of people that help and place all the burden on me. If you could post questions at Wikipedia talk:Copyright problems instead, that might help spread the work around. I have it on my watch-list and will help for sure, but I don't want to have to do it all.— Diannaa (talk) 15:40, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Diannaa … that was as I feared, as you are all stretched so thin. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:26, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
@SandyGeorgia: I'm a student, so I may not be the fastest to reply, but I have a fairly consistent editing schedules and I don't mind helping. If you want to, I don't mind if you post on my talk page in a thread. I'm more than willing to help people through the bramble's nest of cleanup. Sennecaster (Chat) 03:35, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, Sennecaster; I will use your talk page then as I proceed through the hurricanes. I have started work all over creation, but am not yet confident in my methodology for continuing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:35, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Songs of the season

Holiday cheer
Here is a snowman a gift a boar's head and something blue for your listening pleasure. Enjoy and have a wonderful 2022 D. MarnetteD|Talk 02:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
As ever thanks for your help in teaching me about copyvio issues in 2021. MarnetteD|Talk 02:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
Seasons greetings, hope all is well with you— Diannaa (talk) 15:38, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Re Will Todd

Hi There - thanks for your message regarding content at Will Todd. We are the publishers of his music and his agent so were just trying to correct quite a few odd elements on the current page. There are so many troublesome elements eg: the list of works is quite random and confusing. But your comments are noted. Many thanks Tyalgum Press and Will Todd Music (We also own and curate www.willtodd.co.uk) 2A00:23C7:6700:2101:C138:E04A:4CF6:F07F (talk) 08:56, 19 December 2021 (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. Please read and act on the information already in place at User talk:TyalgumPresd. (Sorry that account will have to be blocked, as the username violates our username policy)— Diannaa (talk) 15:43, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

Stephen Garland

In response to the speedy deletion of my article about Donald Kreider, I have created a draft of a considerably expanded and revised article, which avoids direct copying, in so far as possible, of material in obituaries for Donald Kreider. I am in the process of obtaining copyright permission for the photograph of Kreider from his partner Bill White, who took the photo and supplied it to Dartmouth for use in the obituary.

I would like to include a link to an oral history in the Rauner Special Collection at Dartmouth. My preferred link

to an on-line copy of the history was rejected because the site at Google is blacklisted. I can supply a link to the catalog entry for the history in the Rauner Collection, but it is not possible to read the oral history by following that link. How can I make the history readable on-line? 21:44, 20 December 2021 (UTC)SJGarland — Preceding unsigned comment added by SJGarland (talk • contribs)

I don't really understand your question but I have converted the above link into a functional link. Your new draft looks okay from a copyright point of view.— Diannaa (talk) 00:09, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Joyous Season

I wish that you may have a very Happy Holiday! Whether you celebrate Christmas, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Hogmanay, Festivus or your hemisphere's Solstice, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! May the New Year provide you joy and fulfillment! Thanks for everything you do here. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:18, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{subst:User:Coffee/Holidays}} to your fellow editors' talk pages.

Thank you!— Diannaa (talk) 01:08, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Guidance on Drafting

Hello Diannaa - thank you for your attention to Draft:Paul Klimos. As we are new to Wikipedia editing, we would appreciate your guidance on how to rephrase the content of your latest deletions without causing potential copyright violations. Following the initial comments and deletions we got from you, we worked to revise/rephrase the text to avoid any ad literam transposition (even though everything was duly referenced via links). The goal is to list and reference the titles/position held by the individual subject matter of this Wikipedia article, with links to the sources/official websites that list him as such for each position (in addition to various third party news sources about such appointments and positions). Again, thank you very much for your time and patience! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contentforleb (talk • contribs) 16:20, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Why are you saying "we"? Does more than one person have access to your account? — Diannaa (talk) 00:58, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

No, confirming I'm the only person with authorized access to this account. I got into the habit of using "we" in life whenever I can avoid using the "I" =) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contentforleb (talk • contribs) 13:05, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

How to write for Wikipedia: Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students.— Diannaa (talk) 13:16, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Is there a way for me to redo and share with you a new draft of the sections you deleted before publication, such as I ensure it's done correctly once and for all and avoid additional copyright issues? Again, big thanks for your time and patience! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contentforleb (talk • contribs) 14:30, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry I don't have the time to mentor you. Just write the content in your own words and you should do okay.— Diannaa (talk) 14:36, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you - done =) Merry Christmas! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Contentforleb (talk • contribs) 14:59, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

The new version is okay from a copyright point of view. Thanks and Merry Christmas.— Diannaa (talk) 15:04, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

credit to photo portrait of Emmanuel Levinas by Bracha L. Ettinger

Dear Diannaa can you please help my friend Bracha L. Ettinger concerning her portrait of Emmanuel Levinas, done by her as a part of her artistic portraits project in 1991. Many people use this portrait used from the philosopher Wikipedia page without mentioning her name as its author-photographer. Today, Le Figaro printed this photo without giving her due credit. How can this be mended? Best wishes, Dora Doraannao (talk) 19:49, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, you will have to take this up with Le Figaro. I can't help.— Diannaa (talk)

Merry Christmas

Merry Christmas, Diannaa!
Or Season's Greetings or Happy Winter Solstice! As the year winds to a close, I would like to take a moment to recognize your hard work and offer heartfelt gratitude for all you do for Wikipedia. May this Holiday Season bring you nothing but joy, health and prosperity. Onel5969 TT me 22:48, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you and best wishes!!!!

Copy vio Draft:Davide Abbatescianni

Hi Diannaa, thank you for your welcome message. I've tried to rephrase the source with my own words,but I think it's important to mention the main papers he works for. Would that work? Thank you for your time, Luisveraluz (talk) 17:06, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

The new version is better. Thanks— Diannaa (talk) 18:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Possible copyvio in Villa article

I removed text [[8]] from the Villa article which I thought be a likely word for word copyvio from near the top of web page [[9]]. At the bottom of the web page it states 'All Rights Reserved Copyright © 2020'. User:Amit005thmar has recently replaced it with the edit summary minor. Please can you help?SovalValtos (talk) 12:45, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Fixed. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 14:39, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

You've got mail

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 remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template. Doug Weller talk 13:08, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the notice. I don't think I have time to get involved in that issue.— Diannaa (talk) 14:54, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

Schock 23

You made a null edit to this article to add an edit summary WP:RIA. Attribution: text appears to have been copied from Seaward 25 on December 23, 2021. Please see the history of that page for full attribution. I am not sure why you would think that, as exactly no text was copied from Seaward 25. The two boats were designed by different naval architects and made by different builders, there is little in common between them other than they are both sailboats. All these sailboat class articles are written in a common encyclopedic style and use common sets of references, but there is no copying from existing posted articles involved. If in the future you think that text was copied from one article to another can you first bring it up on the article talk page to avoid these mistakes in future? - Ahunt (talk) 20:50, 23 December 2021 (UTC)

The article was listed at CopyPatrol. Here is a link. If you click on the iThenticate link, you will see the matrching text that the bot found that is a match for prose in the Seaward 25. Hence my edit. Sorry to have bothered you.— Diannaa (talk) 20:55, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation, but in comparing the edit that tool flagged I can only conclude that the copypatrol tool is broken. My edit was to add some new refs to Schock 23 and corresponding text and quotes from one of the refs. None of the refs I added is even used in Seaward 25. You can note I am the original editor who started both those sailboat class articles, and have written many hundreds of others, too. All of them follow a standard article layout and general arrangement, tone and style. As far as the iThenticate link links goes, it seems to have flagged a direct quote from the same source (Henkel's book) that I quoted (and footnoted). That website, lakeerieboatsafe.org, appears to have been taken down, but an archived copy can be found here where it is pretty obvious to me that that page was a copyright violation of Henkel's book (which I have here). Likewise it mentions www.boatbuilding.xyz/sailboats-reference/a-winged-keel-is-standard-on-this-one.html (note this is blacklisted website, so I can't fully link it) which is also a copyright violation of the same book. iThenticate flagged Schock 23 as having some words in common with Seaward 25, but these are standard wording descriptions of boat fixtures and interiors. I have no idea why it would flag that article, as hundreds, if not thousands of sailboat articles I have started all use standard descriptions or variations of them. Overall, in reviewing the two reports it seems these tools are very error-prone and should not be relied upon without careful human comparison. As I noted above, I would suggest in future it would be best to bring this up on the specific article talk page, as I watch all the articles I have started. I am here most days and you will normally get a prompt response. - Ahunt (talk) 21:30, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
The bot isn't broken; it just gives the occasional false positive. Given the high volume of reports to be checked each day (75 to 100 reports, representing up to ten hours of work per day) and the tiny number of editors (currently mainly only two people) currently working on this task, it's not realistic to expect talk page discussions to be opened on the off chance that attribution has been added where none is actually required. Careful human checking does indeed take place, but I will still make mistakes from time to time. Sorry, — Diannaa (talk) 16:32, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Okay, well thanks for explaining. If sailboat articles get flagged in the future that will probably be me again, as no one else is writing new sailboat articles right now on en.wikipedia, so feel free to drop me a line if you have any doubts or questions about where text, etc, came from. - Ahunt (talk) 17:00, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction.

Hi Diana, I recently edited an article which got reverted by you. Although I gave a lot of time while editing it, I later checked and realised that content I provided was correct but not related to the article I edited. Thanks for correction. Akshay1478963 (talk) 05:07, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas 2021

Merry Christmas everybody!!!
Merry Christmas everybody!!!

"And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

I bring you good tidings of great joy, which shall be to all people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord."

Luke 2:10-11 (King James Version)

CAPTAIN RAJU(T) is wishing you a Merry Christmas.

This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove.


Spread the cheer by adding {{Subst:Xmas4}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 22:13, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Cheers,— Diannaa (talk) 15:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Season's greetings and Merry Christmas to you and your family. Have a wonderful holiday season. Cheers! RV (talk) 03:06, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Greetings

Thanks! Cheers, — Diannaa (talk) 12:30, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

I am the original contributor

Dear Diannaa: Nice to hear from you! I am the original contributor of AR Computer To Terminate Eyestrain And Myopia https://eyewiki.org/AR_Computer_To_Terminate_Eyestrain_And_Myopia All the contents on the website are written by myself. Could you please tell me what should I do if I want to make a same or similar article on Wikipedia?

Best regards and Happy Christmas

Crescentnz Crescentnz (talk) 02:49, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

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. If the copyright holders wish to release this material under a compatible license, please see WP:Requesting copyright permission for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. The particular article you copied has three authors; all three would have to release the article under a compatible license.— Diannaa (talk) 04:25, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you - Vitamin C

Thank you for policing the multiple edits to Vitamin C and explaining to the offending editor the error of their ways. David notMD (talk) 21:38, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the positive feedback. Cheers,— Diannaa (talk) 23:51, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Reversion of article edits on "The Lord's Day".

After adding citations where requested, adding new, albeit contradictory information in the article, 2000 words were just summarily reverted back to the original article. I have no problem with removing inaccurate information,even if my own, or requests for clarifications, but this is beyond reasonable. You even deleted direct references and citations from respected authorities, and direct references to supporting statements by the Catholic Church!

I can see why many people are ignoring pleas for financial assistance. If facts are just wiped out, who cares about WikiPedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Deusestiudex (talk • contribs) 18:17, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

It wasn't me. I removed some of the non-free content from the citations. Someone else removed the rest of the recent changes.— Diannaa (talk) 21:08, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Glitch in Infobox

Hi, I noticed a glitch in infobox on the article Rohit Thakur (politician) . The infobox is showing him as a Member of the U.S. House of Representatives from Himachal Pradesh When I tried to fix it, I could not find anything related to the error in the source code. I even tried visual editor but still no result.

I request you to please fix it if possible. I would be happy if you could tell me if it was a editing error or wrong source code for infobox. Thanks....👍👍👍👍 Soap Boy 1 (talk) 21:39, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Fixed. MB 22:54, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict):The field "state" in Template:Infobox officeholder is ONLY for US states. Removing this fixes the error. — Diannaa (talk) 22:59, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Sewellia lineolata

Hi Diannaa, I just reviewed Sewellia lineolata, but removed a section and reworded another section for copyvio, could you please take a lokk and see if the old versions need to be struck out? Thanks. Hughesdarren (talk) 10:20, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Done. It would be helpful in the future when removing the content if you would provide in your edit summary the url where you found the matching prose. Thanks.— Diannaa (talk) 13:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Thank you for you service to wikipedia.

Naarter (talk) 20:19, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Naarter!— Diannaa (talk) 22:08, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Merchandise giveaway nomination

A t-shirt!
A token of thanks
Hi Diannaa! I've nominated you (along with all other active admins) to receive a solstice season gift from the WMF. Talk page stalkers are invited to comment at the nomination. Enjoy! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk ~~~~~
A snowflake!

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Diannaa/Archive_79&oldid=1063907151"