Jump to content

User talk:Diannaa/Archive 86

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 80←Archive 84Archive 85Archive 86Archive 87Archive 88→Archive 90

Happy New Year, Diannaa! (2)

Happy New Year!

Diannaa,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Mann Mann (talk) 03:45, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

Thanks! Happy New Year! — Diannaa (talk) 15:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy Kalends of January

Happy New Year!
Wishing you and yours a Happy New Year, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free and may Janus light your way. Ealdgyth (talk) 13:44, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Happy New Year! — Diannaa (talk) 15:42, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Diannaa!

Happy New Year!

Diannaa,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
— Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:28, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

   Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.

— Moops ⋠T⋡ 20:28, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Happy New Year! — Diannaa (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your expertise

Hi, Diannaa. Thanks for finding time and joining the discussion on plagiarism in the talk page of the article "Magtymguly" and letting your opinion be known. Your expertise as an admin competent in that area was indeed very helpful. Thanks again and take care! VisioncurveTimendi causa est nescire 09:52, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

CLOP at Cinematic style of S. S. Rajamouli

Hi Diannaa. Would you determine if the close paraphrasing in that article with the para that starts with "Piyush Roy, a critic and film historian ..." is a copyvio? For the time being, I've changed it into a quote Special:Diff/1131338632 The article was split from S. S. Rajamouli. Thanks for your help! — DaxServer (t · m · c) 18:28, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

Can you please be more specific as to what source I am supposed to check against? Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 23:56, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
Sorry, here is the source — DaxServer (t · m · c) 09:20, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. It looks like a match, but it's okay to keep with the addition of the quotation marks. — Diannaa (talk) 15:31, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the review — DaxServer (t · m · c) 17:19, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi again! In the latest version, there is a 20% match from one source in the Earwig's tool. Does this particular phrase constitute a copyvio? If so, what is the approach to be taken here? Seems introduced in July 2022 before the content split in November. — DaxServer (t · m · c) 15:23, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
I have removed it but have not done revision deletion on the S. S. Rajamouli article. — Diannaa (talk) 15:36, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Could you also delete my sandbox, I copied the content to fix the references, thus, copyvio material will also be present in it User:DaxServer/sandbox — DaxServer (t · m · c) 15:46, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
OK, done. Sandbox talk page still exists — Diannaa (talk) 15:49, 5 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! — DaxServer (t · m · c) 15:51, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Teli

Possible copyvio [1] [2]. Would you mind having a look? Dr.Pinsky (talk) 07:48, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not seeing it, not in these two diffs. — Diannaa (talk) 14:48, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
One of the major issues with Google Books is that not everyone sees the same things. Thanks. Dr.Pinsky (talk) 13:15, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Tulaji Angre

Hello, Diannaa. You previously had a look at Draft:Tulaji Angre and attributed parts to public domain. I had a look at Earwig while reviewing and there are a few sentences and phrases that appear to be identical with two separate Wordpress blogs, 1, 2 and not copied from the public domain reference. I'd like to ask are these copyright violations (i.e., do the Wordpress blogs have copyright, or did the Wordpress blogs simply copy from somewhere else)? Also, if the blogs have copyright and are not circular, is the copyvio bad enough for a revdel? Many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 23:49, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

It looks like the matching content came from Battle of Vijaydurg, where that content has been present since December 2015. I will add the required attribution. — Diannaa (talk) 03:22, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Concern -- Alls quiet on the western front

Hi there, I'm not sure if this is the correct place to bring this to your attention, my sincere apologies if it's not.

I noticed that wiki's plot synopsis for the movie "Alls quiet on the western front" (2022) is identical to the synopsis on IMDB -- word for word.

I'm not proficient enough to tell which was written first, however I wanted to bring this to your attention, because I think that IMDB's may have been up first.

Thank you in advance for your assistance. Nala5150 (talk) 07:16, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Our version was written by long-term trusted Wikipedians so I would say that we had it first. — Diannaa (talk) 12:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Is there a technical way of proving who was first? Just wondering. EMsmile (talk) 12:43, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
Not with IMDb, because it is not archived by the Wayback Machine. So I typically look at our page history and see who added the plot description and whether or not it changed organically over time.
So what we have here in this particular case is a plot description added in October 2022 by longtime user:Ed! (diff) which has only a tiny overlap, with copy edits by user:Patar knight (diff), where the overlap goes up to a higher percentage. Neither of these people have any history of copyright issues and I trust them both as longtime Wikipedians and fellow members of the Military History wikiproject. — Diannaa (talk) 12:56, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
thanks, good to know. So it's quite a cumbersome process to find out who was first, not an automated two-click effort... EMsmile (talk) 13:38, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
For this case in particular, I can fairly definitively say that my major edit was not lifted from IMDB because a later editor fixed a mistake I made about whether the young German soldier collecting dog tags from fallen Germans at the end of the film ends up collecting Paul Baumer's. [3] This mistake was in my original edit above, but not in the IMDB summary. Digging a bit deeper into the article history, it appears the IMDB summary would have been lifted between this edit on Nov. 13 which changed the formatting around "despondent, battle-hardened" [4] and this Nov. 28 edit [5] which lowercased "Spring". Nothing in the edit history would indicate anything suspiciously inorganic about the editing up to that point. -- Patar knight - chat/contributions 05:29, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the additional analysis, @Patar knight. — Diannaa (talk) 20:21, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Taylor Raynor

Hi Diannaa, lots of copyright violation here, mostly from [6]. When you have a chance....thanks. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:3F00 (talk) 05:31, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Revision deletion complete. Thanks. — Diannaa (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Cheers and Happy New Year. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:3F00 (talk) 02:00, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Revdel

Hello Diannaa, Could you revdel this edit copied from newindianexpress.com. Thanks - SUN EYE 1 12:17, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

No. The only overlap I see is a quotation. — Diannaa (talk) 20:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

Khamba and Thoibi

Hi again. Could you take a look at this one? This is the copyvio report. Not sure if this is a mirror or not. Thanks. Onel5969 TT me 12:34, 10 January 2023 (UTC)

The text is a match for the book https://archive.org/stream/dli.csl.7185/7185_djvu.txt published in 1908 and attributed in the Wikipedia page. This should be at Wikisource though, not at Wikipedia. — Diannaa (talk) 20:45, 10 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Sorry I missed this response. This is a new one on me. How would I go about doing that? Or proposing it? Onel5969 TT me 12:27, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Wikisource#Moving texts from Wikipedia to Wikisource. I suggest proposing the move on the talk page first. — Diannaa (talk) 15:13, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hi, can you RevDel two edits at Talk:List of political parties in Belgium please? They are phishing or blatant spam, so eligible as purely disruptive material, with one of them having the link in the edit summary. It's the two edits by 27.123.255.244 which I reverted here. Thanks! Fram (talk) 08:48, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Fram! Someone has oversighted the content while I was sleeping! Cheers, — Diannaa (talk) 15:11, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
An admin who sleeps while talk page posts are waiting? Off to ArbCom with you! Thank you, also to the anonymous oversighter :-) Fram (talk) 15:17, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
I can't even tell who did it! Talk about the dark web! — Diannaa (talk) 15:19, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Revdel request (2)

Hi, can you please delete this version of WASH. I had copied there a copyrighted sentence by mistake. Have already corrected it now but the old version still has that sentence. By the way, is there a place where I can request this in a more automated fashion so that I don't have to bother you with having to do this manually? EMsmile (talk) 12:31, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

My suggestion is to NOT paste copyright text into Wikipedia at all. You should use an external editor such as Microsoft Word or Google Docs and work on it there until you are sure it's completely original. That said, revision deletion can be requested using the template {{copyvio-revdel}}. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 15:02, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
OK, thanks. So that template would have be placed at the top of the old version of the article, is that right? EMsmile (talk) 08:27, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
No. Place the template on the current version, and list in the template which diffs need to be hidden and why. Please see the template documentation for full instructions. — Diannaa (talk) 21:29, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Limb diff request

Hi, I am entirely new to this Wikipedia thing! Trying to figure out how I can tell which text is copyright on the people with limb difference page I am working on? Thanks for your help! Calculatedfire (talk) 13:54, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Under current copyright law, 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. Exceptions include works of the US Government and material specifically released under license. Even then, proper attribution is required. Have a look at some of the links I placed on your talk page for more info. — Diannaa (talk) 14:56, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Globus Bank

Hello Diannaa, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Globus Bank, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: There is a clear credible claim of significance, and the duplicated material is basic info not sufficiently creative for copyright. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:44, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

I didn't look at who tagged the article before declining, and the script defaults to "newbie message" by default. On G12, the only text I found that was copied was about the bank being licensed, and that it provides commercial services, which by my understanding of policy are basic facts that don't qualify for copyright. But you're kind of the resident expert on copyright, am I wrong? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:49, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Ivanvector. I will certainly review my A7s, I always seem to misjudge with my A7s, hence the tagging to get a second opinion. I've gone ahead and cleaned the copyvio. — Diannaa (talk) 22:54, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

Possible confusion

Hi Diannaa, I don't quite understand these removals. Your edit summary makes reference to a now blocked user's sockpuppetry, but this material was added in large part to the article in July 2022, while the user was only blocked in November 2022 and only engaged in sockpuppetry following their block in December 2022 - none of which has any obvious bearing on the edits that they made back in July 2022, which at that point were legitimate, making your edit summary seem somewhat retroactive and needless. Is there something that I'm missing here? Iskandar323 (talk) 15:18, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

I have restored the edits. The particular content he added in the July 2022 diff was removed on January 6 with the edit summary "None of the sources say that this is about a proxy conflict"; the material was restored by the sock; hence my removal. I have to get ready to go to work now, see you later. — Diannaa (talk) 15:28, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Ah, I see. I hadn't seen that Vanserver had also been identified as a linked sock. Still, the content is being discussed on talk, so thank you. Iskandar323 (talk) 15:35, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
My edit summary could have been better, i.e. " sock of user:Mausebru". Sorry about that. — Ninja Diannaa (Talk) 17:41, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio opinion

Is this too close? It's in the current version, as well. - CorbieVreccan ☊ ☼ 21:55, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I took it out. I won't be doing revision deletion though, since it's been there for 12 years. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 22:22, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikimedia blog post about CopyPatrol and our partnership with Turnitin

https://diff.wikimedia.org/2022/12/07/how-turnitin-helps-the-wikimedia-foundation-preserve-the-integrity-of-wikipedia-content/

Page on Niels Keiding deleted

The page on Niels Keiding was “work in progress”. Permission will indubitably be speedily given by ISI to quote material from their ‘In Memoriam’, which incidentally was written at the request of ISI by close colleagues of his who, like me, are members of ISI, and who are actively supporting the creation of this article. We are honestly quite astonished by your action, which seems like vandalism. However, copyright rules are copyright rules, so we understand your action. Though a day’s warning might have been nice. Can you please restore the page, but now deleting the material which you consider in violation of copyright rules, so that our work can speedily continue? You also deleted the “talk page” which contained information for us editors, to use in further building the article. Please restore that too? Richard Gill (talk) 14:39, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

PS feel free to move deleted pages to my user space. Richard Gill (talk) 14:44, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry but the entire page was deleted because once the overlapping text is removed, there's nothing left. I will restore the page and list at WP:CP as an alternative to deletion. This process gives a minimum of one week to get the page into copyright compliance. — Diannaa (talk) 15:07, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, that’s wonderful! One week should be plenty! Richard Gill (talk) 15:12, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
I believe the page now complies with copyright; the week has gone by. Several people are working on the page (and several more want to). Am I allowed to delete the offending material (which is hidden behind the copyright notice) and delete the copyright notice too? Of can only an admin do that? I suppose it it still listed at WP:CP, can the listing go? Richard Gill (talk) 15:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Case closed. Thank you for your participation in the cleanup. — Diannaa (talk) 21:36, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! Richard Gill (talk) 03:05, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Apparent block evasion at Bell Labs

Hi Diannaa, 74.105.165.178 (talk · contribs) quacks a lot like Antonio cruz wiki (talk · contribs). Thanks, 2601:19E:4180:6D50:0:0:0:3F00 (talk) 05:23, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Spot checks don't reveal any copyvios or prose that the other editor had used. — Diannaa (talk) 19:59, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

List of The Master of Ragnarok & Blesser of Einherjar volumes

Could you take a look at this. I was simply going to give attribution to it being copied from The Master of Ragnarok & Blesser of Einherjar, but the copyvios report does not give me confidence that the information was not a copyvio in the main article as well. Anyway, is there a way to check if this is a mirror? Thanks as always. Onel5969 TT me 17:32, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Exclamation marks and dramatic prose are the hallmark of copyright plot descriptions prepared by the makers of the series. There's copies on Amazon, Barns & Noble, Apple, etc. in the examples I checked. So I would say it's copyvio. If you could clean it yourself or list at WP:CP that would be perfect. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 19:56, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
I'll take care of it. Onel5969 TT me 20:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Turns out, there was no copyvio on the main page, that was added after they broke it off, so I just G12'd the new list article. Onel5969 TT me 20:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
OK thanks for taking care of it. — Diannaa (talk) 20:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! Richard Gill (talk) 03:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Partial copyright deletion of Perko, Inc. article

Hello Diannaa. I work for Perko, Inc. I just added the connected contributor (paid) template to my user profile. I was tasked on writing the Perko, Inc. Wikipedia page. I was not aware that pages were reviewed while still in the draft phase. Most of the article content was removed due to alleged copyrighted content. The source reviewed was from our own commercial product catalog from the E&P Marine website (one of our distributors). Our product catalogs are listed on our website at [7]https://perko.com/catalog_downloads/. This was our own content written for our product catalogs. You can find that content in our Recreational Catalog via our website on pages 4 and 5. If I can help you clarify anything else please let me know. Thanks. Zeromyst (talk) 21:57, 20 January 2023 (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.
A second problem is the content you have so far; you haven't shown any reson why the company is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Please see Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) for more info on that topic. Another problem is that the draft is worded like an advertisement or a sales catalogue, which is not at all the type of content that will get your draft accepted. — Diannaa (talk) 22:59, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Close paraphrase/plagiarism question

Greetings. I hate to bother you, but a question has come up and I was wondering if you could take some time and look at it for me. I thought I had a clear grasp of copyvios and close paraphrasing. I've written a number of articles on NRHP sites, and always thought I was paraphrasing the underlying NPS source adequately. Recently, another very experienced editor, who I have the utmost respect for, and taken me to task for close paraphrasing/plagiarism on these articles. Now, I think you know my work enough to know how much I care about following policy/guidelines. You can find the relevant discussion at User talk:Onel5969#Possible copyright violations and plagiarism of text in NRHP articles, and further at Talk:Allentown Bridge. Now when I do a copyvio on Bear Spring House, Guardhouse, and Spring it yields this. You are one of, if not the most, competent copyvio editor I know, and I would appreciate your take on all this. Before that other editor and I (and they have offered to help, so the onus would not just be on me) spend quite a bit of time ripping these articles to shreds, it would be nice to have a third set of eyes. I understand if you don't want to take the time to slog through the information, but if you do have a chance, I'd greatly appreciate it. Onel5969 TT me 22:13, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry but I won't be able to help with that issue. I don't even have time to read all the material, so sorry. — Diannaa (talk) 23:11, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
No worries. Thanks anyway. Onel5969 TT me 01:43, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Springfield FC

Hi there, I see you have come across the Springfield FC page that I created. I note you removed the history despite it being from the clubs website which is under free use to use from. I would appreciate it if you left alone such pieces that you obviously know nothing about. Regards Wilkie2012 (talk) 23:42, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry but the page I found the matching content is marked as "© All content is Copyright Springfield FC 2023". which means that you can't copy it here. It's a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy to do so. — Diannaa (talk) 01:35, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Probably copyvio

Pretty sure the clearly promotional material added in this wholly unacceptable edit, already reverted, is a copyvio. Needs a revdel I think. oknazevad (talk) 01:24, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Rev-del done. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 01:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Iker Unzu Draft

Hello, Diannaa. You previously had a look at Draft:Iker Unzu and I have some questions about the review.

First, I don't understand about the added sources being unreliable. Which ones aren't reliable? Because most of them are from well known newspapers in Spain, do you mean the ones that are not about Iker Unzu specifically?

Second, you mentioned that the article is a copy of another article written on the YouTube Wiki, however the article I've written hasn't been copied from absolutely no web, on the contrary: Some time ago I wrote the first draft about Unzu and an unidentified user copied and pasted the information on that Wiki, thus stealing my article. Unfortunately I don't know how to demonstrate this, but perhaps the Wayback Machine could be used?

I do have the article code saved, his copy is badly done and contains errors, since he didn't copy and paste the article correctly when creating it in YouTube Wiki.

How can I improve the article/biography and what references should I delete to make it work?

Iker Unzu is a notable figure in Spain and I think he has the necessary articles/sources to be in Wikipedia, so I'll make the necessary changes to improve the article.

If necessary, I'll report the user who created the copied article on YouTube Wiki for copying.

I'd really appreciate your advice on how to improve it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Youplanetec (talk • contribs)

Thanks for your help!

There are multiple problems here. There's Iker Unzu created October 14, 2021 and there's Draft:Iker Unzu 2 created October 3, 2021 and there's Draft:Iker Unzu originally created September 16, 2021 and re-created January 26, 2023. None of these previous versions were created under the username Youplanetec (your current username); they were all created by user:Emmacham. All these versions contain the same content. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iker Unzu which closed as "delete" on 3 November 2021.
Since the older versions of the page were deleted and there's no way for you to prove at this point that user:Youplanetec and user:Emmacham are the same person. For that reason, I have restored the old revisions of Draft:Iker Unzu. Sorry I can't help you with the notability concern. I suggest you have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Iker Unzu and WP:reliable sources and Wikipedia:Notability (people) for what it will take to get a Wikipedia article published for this person. Not everybody is notable enough as Wikipedia defines it to qualify for an article. That may be the case for this particular person, or there may be Spanish-language sources that you can use to establish notability. I am not the person who declined the draft, so I can't comment further as to why the referencing is currently inadequate. — Diannaa (talk) 20:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Copyrighted material and fair use

Shortcut

Hello Diannaa! The quote you mentioned falls within the fair use policy of Wikipedia editing guidelines. It's a short quote and serves to further clarify what is being said. Please see the shortcut link provided.

Although quoting involves copying another writer's work without permission, it is generally permitted under fair use rules in the United States. However, as is the case with fair-use images, fair-use quotation has limitations:

  • The copied material should not be a substantial portion of the work being quoted and a long quotation should not be used where a shorter quotation would express the same information. What constitutes a substantial portion depends on many factors, such as the length of the original work, and the importance and relevance of the quoted text to that work.
  • The quotation must be useful and aid understanding of the subject; irrelevant quotations should be removed.
  • All quotations must be attributed to their sources.

Please better acquaint yourself with fair use policy in regards to copy-righted materials. If you have other issues with the quote, please leave a note on my talk page and we can discuss. Arkenstrone (talk) 22:43, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves.
Also I should mention that you repeatedly describe the content I removed as a quotation, but there were actually no quotation marks around the passage that I removed, so it's not a quote, it's a passage that's been copied, and hence is a violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 23:00, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Looking more closely at your edit, I see that you are referring to the Pope Pius XII quote. Alright, fair enough. Your shortening of that quote is acceptable. It wasn't clear to me which quote you were referring to. Arkenstrone (talk) 23:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

CopyPatrol help needed

Hi everybody with an interest in copyright cleanup. After seven years as the primary patroller assessing reports at CopyPatrol, I have reached the point where I am no longer able to work at the volume I have been doing all this time. For the last couple of weeks I have been suffering ill effects from too much computer time, with a sore neck and shoulders, and I have to protect my health to prevent permanent damage to my rotator cuff in particular. I would appreciate it if people could stop by at CopyPatrol daily and assess some reports. You don't have to be an admin to do this task; any experienced editor should be able to quickly figure it out. If you are just starting out, you might like to try assessing reports about biographies or schools – they are pretty easy as the issues are usually quite obvious.

Pinging some CopyPatrol regulars: DanCherek; Wiae; Ymblanter; Red-tailed hawk; Crow; Moneytrees; Sphilbrick. I will also post a similar message at WP:AN. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 15:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about your health, Diannaa, and hope you feel better soon. DanCherek (talk) 15:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks DanCherek! — Diannaa (talk) 15:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Hi Diannaa! I'm sorry to hear about your health and I wish you a speedy recovery. — Red-tailed hawk (nest) 20:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Enjoy the break Diannaa. You more than deserve it. Moneytrees🏝️(Talk) 20:30, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for all the work you've done regardless. I am praying that you don't suffer any permanent damage. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:41, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Very sorry to hear of this, and hope you feel better soon. Your tireless work at CopyPatrol is much appreciated but rightfully shouldn't be more important than your health. We'll be sure to step up while you take a much needed break! Yeeno (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Let me join others in wishing you will and encouraging you to put your health first. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 21:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Sorry to hear about your health and thanks a lot for this long-term huge amount of work.--Ymblanter (talk) 23:36, 28 January 2023 (UTC)
Thank you so much everybody for your kind words and thoughts, and thanks to all who have assessed copyvio reports today. Keep up the good work! — Diannaa (talk) 00:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
P.S. It's a relief to know I am expendable! (Antandrus #29) — Diannaa (talk) 00:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Diannaa, adding to the well wishes above. Taking time to rest and recover is so important and I'm glad you are doing that! /wiae /tlk 00:56, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Echoing the sentiments of others, take care of yourself. -- Whpq (talk) 12:07, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for all your help and work about the place and hope you get well soon. Hughesdarren (talk) 12:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
Diannaa, only recently have I become aware of the breadth and depth of your contributions here. Your knowledge and responsiveness are unparalleled. In your absence (and willingness to preserve articles by cleaning them of copyright violations) perhaps we should follow a more stringent practice: Where new articles are infected by plagiarism and copyright, they should be "shot on sight". It is abusive to expect others to clean up those violations.
Best wishes to you, and I hope you are able to spend some time enjoying the magnificent scenery of your beautiful nation. Kablammo (talk) 12:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
You forget I live in Edmonton, lol! Not very scenic, especially this time of year. Thanks for stopping by, thanks for your concern and kind words. — Diannaa (talk) 16:49, 29 January 2023 (UTC)
This is very concerning. If you look at almost any of the critical tasks within Wikipedia, whether it be stamping out vandals, dealing with sockpuppets, clearing out backlogs such as AFD, and yes, addressing copyright concerns, there is typically a small handful of editors taking on the lion share of the work. This in itself is unsurprising, it's Pareto's law at work, which applies almost everywhere, within Wikipedia and in the real world. However, unlike the traditional expression of the law, that 80% of the work is done by 20% of the participants, in CopyPatrol it is Pareto’s law on steroids. I haven't run the numbers but I'm sure that more than 99% of the work gets done by less than 1% of the editors, even if I restrict "editors" to mean active editors. Kudos to those who take this on, and I've been very pleased to see @DanCherek: contribute so strongly, but I've been long concerned about the day that Diannaa gets burnt out. I can relate, in a bit of a wiki funk myself. While this would be a perfect time to step up and commit to helping more, the timing is awkward as I have grandchildren coming to visit tomorrow for a week. My total online time, much less Wikipedia activity will be severely limited. I'll try to commit to helping when that week is over. Diannaa helpfully included a link to the documentation page and detailed instructions. CopyPatrol work is not especially hard, although there are some annoying pitfalls. My suggestions to anyone new interested in helping: 1. Start with low hanging fruit, some of the reports are easy to assess, skip the tricky ones until you have more experience.2. Reach out to any of the regulars identified by Diannaa (in my case, after 10 days or so). While I can't speak for every single one of them, I've reached out to many of them when encountering a report that seems to be tricky, and in 100% of those queries, have received helpful and friendly advice. S Philbrick(Talk) 14:06, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
I really hope you feel better soon, but until then, enjoy your break! — Signed,The4lines |||| (Talk) (Contributions) 04:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Copyrights (Ref: Harold Lehman)

Hi Diannaa,

I'm responding to your note to me regarding "...the essential rule of respecting copyrights. Edits to Wikipedia, such as your edit to the page Harold Lehman, may not contain material from copyrighted sources unless used with permission."

Recently I updated the page about my father, Harold Lehman to correct some inaccuracies stated in the original text. While doing so, I added a few other sentences to provide readers with more information about his other accomplishments. The quote and and one or two sentences about his life, I copied from my website, www.haroldlehman.com, which I created for and about him about 25 years ago. I own the copyright to that material, as well as tapes and videos of my dad, which I also own.

I don't see that you actually removed anything... So please let me know if there is some action you want me to take. I did want to add a citation and possibly a link to the YouTube Channel I created, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfL_gUUPPm8IkGclndmlJmg, but as a "newbie" to editing in Wikipedia, the steps necessary and short-cuts to use were not intuitive.

Thank you.

Lisa Lehman Trager Tragester (talk) 22:26, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Tragester, you can get an idea of what I removed by checking the CopyPatrol report: click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. You can't add copyright content to Wikipedia, even if you are the copyright holder, unless you release it under a compatible license. If you want to do that, please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. I have added a link to the YouTube channel at the bottom of the article as an external link. — Diannaa (talk) 00:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Epic Systems

Hi Diannaa, I got your name from the list of administrators who help with copyvio issues. A {{Copyvio}} template was placed on Epic Systems by an IP editor whose only other recent edit I just reverted. I think that the Epic Systems edit is vandalism, but I'm not sure where to report this. The article seems to be reasonably well sourced, and Earwig's Copyvio Detector give only a 22% chance that there is a violation. Is there a page to list questionable copyright violation notices? Thanks, Leschnei (talk) 15:47, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

It's best not to go by the percentage but to have a close look at what the tool found. For this particular article I found some content copied from The New York Times back in 2015. I have removed it. Please don't describe edits as vandalism that are not vandalism. There is certainly copyvio in the article, and it's not vandalism to report it. — Diannaa (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for taking care of it. Clearly I should have looked more carefully through the copyvio check. Leschnei (talk) 23:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Byzantine Empire

Hi @Diannaa

You taught me a lot when I worked on the Greece–Turkey relations page a year ago. I wanted to get your perspective on a different page.

There has been a lively debate over a sentence in Byzantine Empire. Upon researching the sources, I came across text that was very similar to what is written in a source. I wanted to ask for your opinion if you consider this a violation of WP:CLOP. If you agree, your stated opinion may help with the discussions.

Below is my quotation from the source and second the current text being debated.

James, Liz (2010). A Companion to Byzantium. Chichester: John Wiley. ISBN 978-1-4051-2654-0. P.5

“But from the start, there were two major differences between the Roman and Byzantine empires: Byzantium was, for much of its life, a Greek-speaking empire, orientated towards Greek, not Latin culture; and it was a Christian empire”

Although the Roman state continued and its traditions were maintained, modern historians distinguish Byzantium from ancient Rome insofar as it was centred on Constantinople, oriented towards Greek rather than Latin culture and characterised by Eastern Orthodox Christianity.

To spare you reading the Talk page, I've advocating that we add "Greek language" and replace with "Christianity" as per the sources but some people insist on keeping the same text as it's fine even though it isn't. Elias (talk) 19:11, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I would go with a simpler version such as "Although the Roman state continued and its traditions were maintained, the Byzantine empire used the Greek language and favored the Eastern Orthodox version of Christianity" — Diannaa (talk) 20:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

ClaraFishers's edits

Hi Diannaa, I noticed that on January 21 you warned the user (whom I've now blocked) for copyright violations. Since that time, I believe she's made additional copyright violations. For example, at Hinduism in Canada I noticed at least one relatively small copyright violation, but she's added a lot of material, and I haven't checked each piece. The one I noticed was inserted in this edit and involves the film maker Leena Manimekalai. If you have time, please take a look. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:58, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

I will do this later. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 20:33, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio revdel on Nupur Sharma

Hi Diannaa. I've removed a copyvio on the page added here [8]. There are 149 revisions in between [9]. Does it warrant a revdel? Thanks for handling this! — DaxServer (t · m · c) 14:25, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

No, that's too much in my opinion. We are typically not doing such extensive revision deletion any more. — Diannaa (talk) 20:27, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the links you sent and I will definitely do everything I can to avoid copyright violations again in the future! MnemonicSonic (talk) 17:02, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Draft: Klau Library (Cincinnati)

Hi Diannaa, I saw that on February 4, the draft of Klau Library (Cincinnati) page was speedily deleted for copyright infringement of https://jewishlibraries.org/klau-library-huc-cincinnati/. I provided them with the text that I wrote about the library. The team at jewishlibraries.org said they are willing to provide documentation of that so that the content can be used here, but I'm not sure how that's done. Thanks. ZacSifron (talk) 18:25, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

If the copyright holder wishes 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. — Diannaa (talk) 20:24, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Hello, jewishlibraries.org used material created by and solicited from me without claiming copyright. Would an email from the organization to permissions-en@wikimedia.org clarifying their release of rights to the text be sufficient for restoration of the draft? ZacSifron (talk) 21:23, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
Yes, they would be the copyright holders. — Diannaa (talk) 00:12, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
They have submitted a release of copyright to that address, with the Ticket#2023020710040754. ZacSifron (talk) 18:55, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
I have added a template to the draft talk page to make it easier for the volunteer response team to match it with the ticket. I am not a VRT member so I am unable to assess the email to see if it meets our requirements. I can restore the draft once this has been done. Thanks. — Diannaa (talk) 19:41, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
I believe the talk page was deleted by Liz. ZacSifron (talk) 18:50, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, I saw that. — Diannaa (talk) 19:29, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio again

Hello Diannaa. I hope you are well. The copyvio that has had to be removed before here has happened again. MarnetteD|Talk 01:31, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Revdel done. Thanks for reporting. — Diannaa (talk) 01:55, 7 February 2023 (UTC)
Thank you as well for the cleanup :-) MarnetteD|Talk 02:15, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Humanitarian response to the 2023 Turkey–Syria earthquake

Hi, looks like that page has a copyvio: [10]. Especially the first link. Thepharoah17 (talk) 09:35, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

I have cleaned the article. — Diannaa (talk) 15:18, 8 February 2023 (UTC)
People are already adding more copyvio. I am unable to look after this article at this time, as I am nursing a sore shoulder and have reduced my editing time considerably. Sorry, — Diannaa (talk) 15:28, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

Police caution edit

I'm going to revert your accusation that I edited in copyrighted content on: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Police_caution&action=history This information is from the Association of Chief Police Officers, a public body from England and Wales. The document itself says 'not protectively marked' (i.e. ready for dissemination), and also has been made available via a FOIA request. Please do not remove content without understanding the laws of the content you are removing in future please. Apeholder (talk) 19:03, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Please don't do that. Under current copyright law, 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. Exceptions include works of the US Government and material specifically released under license. Please see WP:Compatible license for a list of compatible licenses. — Diannaa (talk) 19:51, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
Firstly, this is not "literature", these are not college papers or literary works. The College of Policing is a government body that regulates Policing standards in England and Wales. Please note that ACPO was the body replaced by the NPCC in 2018, so any references to either are still valid.
The document itself states:
"It is NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED under the Government Protective Marking Scheme and it is disclosable under the Freedom of Information Act 2000."
The NPCC copyright policy gives various exemptions also[1]:
The only exceptions are those allowed under copyright law, where material can be used without permission or payment for:
  • research or private study
  • legitimate criticism or review
  • education (as long as it doesn't involve multiple copies)
  • in legal proceedings
Wikipedia describes itself as an educational resource.
Furthermore, the College of Policing makes their copyright policy very clear[2]:
Use of the Information, expressly made available under this licence indicates your acceptance of the terms and conditions below. The Licensor grants you a worldwide, royalty-free, perpetual, non-exclusive licence to use the Information for non-commercial purposes only subject to the conditions below.
This licence does not affect your freedom under fair dealing or fair use or any other copyright or database right exceptions and limitations.
You are free to:
  • copy, re-publish, distribute and transmit the Information (excluding logos) for non-commercial purposes
  • combine the Information (excluding logos) with other information for non-commercial purposes
  • translate the Information into Welsh
  • embed or link to any Information for non-commercial purposes
West Yorkshire Police have also reiterated the protective marking scheme[3]:
The asset is marked ‘NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED’ (NPM) if accidental or deliberate disclosure of it outside the police service would have little impact on the Force.
Examples of NPM information is that which is already available in the public domain, such as BBC news, internet, westyorkshirepolice.uk, beatcrime.info, NPT websites etc.
In short, please do not remove material on the assumption that it is copyrighted without actual evidence to do so. The UK is not Canada.Apeholder (talk) 13:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
(talk page watcher), Apeholder, I am not aware of any editor active on this project who is more familiar with Wikipedia's copyright policies than Diannaa. If she says there is a problem with the stuff you are posting, your best response would be something along the lines of "Oh, sorry - please can you explain what the problem is?"
In this case, and I'll defer to Diannaa on this if she says that I'm wrong, is that the statement above is not compliant with our copyright policies. We release out content under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. Amongst other things, that means that we give people license to use the text of our articles for commercial purposes. It looks like the waiver above licenses people to use it for non-commcercial purposes; therefore, even with attribution, we can't copy it here because we would be inviting people to use it in ways that it has not been released for. Please, therefore, don't reinstate that content. Girth Summit (blether) 14:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
There is a clear exemption in the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License[4]:
Notices:
You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.Apeholder (talk) 14:52, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
What you are quoting is an exception for material that is under a Creative Commons license. The material you are proposing to use is not under a Creative Commons license. The material is copyrighted, and the copyright holder has provided specific criteria under which they allow the use of the material. That license to use material includes a restriction limiting reproduction to non-commercial use only and has limited permission for derivative works. Wikipedia's licensing requires that the material be allowed for commercial use and derivative works. Wikipedia:File copyright tags/Free licenses provides a list of acceptable free licenses. -- Whpq (talk) 15:02, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ https://www.npcc.police.uk/terms-and-conditions/
  2. ^ https://www.college.police.uk/non-commercial-college-licence
  3. ^ https://www.westyorkshire.police.uk/sites/default/files/2018-03/protective_marking_government_protective_marking_scheme.pdf
  4. ^ https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/

Sketchy fair-use rationale

First a bit of background; I was alerted via the WP:RFPP board to a user adding a lot of amateur sketches of biographical subjects to articles, some quite inappropriate (e.g. [11] [12]). Now this user has begun adding copyrighted screenshots to those biographical articles, citing me by name in the fair use rationale per my earlier rejection of their drawings. I don't care if they mention me in a rationale, but my concern is that it's not a valid application of fair use. For example, this one used in Jocelyne LaGarde is a screenshot from a film. A screenshot of a film could be appropriate if we were illustrating something specific from the film e.g., a character (vs the actor), or a scene. In that case, the rationale would be that there were clearly no other alternatives in existence outside of screenshots from the film. On the other hand licensable photos of the actor could conceivably exist. Let me know what you think. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:54, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

A screen shot from a film is definitely a better option IMO than a user-generated cartoon. But as a general rule I don't think it's the way to go. I think File:Jocelyne LaGarde.png might receive a lot of comments if listed at FFD. — Diannaa (talk) 19:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio text in one article subsequently copied to another article

Hi Diannaa and talk page stalkers: I'm afraid I've discovered a bit of a mess. I found a great chunk of copyvio from this ArchDaily article at UK pavilion at Expo 2010 (confirmatory Archive.org archive of the original from 2010), which I hope and trust I have now rewritten out of existence. Revision deletion is needed starting with this edit on 7 August 2016 by Hzh. However, looking closely at the history before attempting Template:Copyvio-revdel, I found that on 8 August, in the next edit after the series by Hzh, you had attributed the text to the Thomas Heatherwick article. (You left a notification template on Hzh's user talk. Hzh was at that time extremely prolific in article space, but I see no indication of other copying between articles around that time, or of earlier copyright warnings on their talkpage except for an image issue. I've dropped them a note alerting them to this post and saying I don't blame them at all. I also checked the image that they added to the pavilion article at that time, and FlickrBot passed it on Commons.) The original copyright violation at Thomas Heatherwick was this edit on 22 May 2013 by Jamietron, adding a whole lot of text on different works by Heatherwick, with several sources. Jamietron's only other edit (Xtools confirms no deleted contributions) was the next edit to the Heatherwick article, also adding text (whose phrasing also makes me suspect copyvio of at least one of the two cited sources). Hzh deleted text from that article after their copying, but what remains there concerning the pavilion that is sourced to thisDezeen article may still be copyvio; it and all the other sections to which Jamietron made additions will need to be checked in their current versions against the cited sources. I can't get to that for at least a day (I have a complex edit elsewhere that will take me several more hours to complete), but for information, note that Jamietron made the common error of putting the publication date of the sources into the citation template as accessdates. The sources all predate their addition by some time. If no one else can get to it first, I will commit to checking the Heatherwick article against all of Jamietron's cited sources, within the next couple of days, and then requesting revision deletion. (If the article is just stubbed and then rev-deleted, I'll have to find a cached or mirrored version to do that, since I don't have the admin glasses any more. :-)) Yngvadottir (talk) 01:45, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi Yngvadottir. I have done the revision deletion on the UK pavilion at Expo 2010 article. If you have time to clean the Thomas Heatherwick article in the next few days that would be great. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 21:52, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
OK, I think (I hope) that huge edit did it. There turned out to have been another 2-edit contributor, Haemo5000, who edited immediately prior to Jamietron, on 25 April 2013, so I worked from this combined diff. Some prose had been moved to the end of the article, and Worth Abbey had been interpolated since. I wound up dickering with the chronological order of the Selected works and also working on the Garden Bridge subsection and the very start of the Learning Hub subsection; that and the other works that have been added since also need checking, for excessive length / promotionalism even if there isn't further copyvio. But I've worked on this for much of 2 days and am about done for now, and it's going to be 600 or so revision deletions, and argh. I just hope the bits I worked on are clean now. Yngvadottir (talk) 11:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks so much for taking charge of this case; I have had to reduce my computer time for health reasons so I really appreciate you doing so. Don't worry if it's not perfectly clean; it's really good. I am not going to rev-del 600 edits though; it's too much. — Diannaa (talk) 12:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for that high praise; I hope it's deserved. I did see your notice about health problems, and feel awful bringing this here. Thank you for taking the time to look! Since the history is still visible, I hope others will help by checking out other derived pages. And I will get back to the later additions when I can. Yngvadottir (talk) 23:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

I have no clue what the issue is since 100% of what I wrote came directly from the Supreme Court opinions. I have no other knowledge of that case, nor did I read any secondary sources. AlwaysVMW (talk) 03:50, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for the mistake. I have re-added the content and added a citation, along with a {{PD-notice}} template to indicate that the text is public domain and okay to copy verbatim. — Diannaa (talk) 21:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

CopyPatrol help needed today

Hi everybody. There's quite a few cases listed right now at CopyPatrol, and we could use some help today. You don't have to be an admin to do this task; any experienced editor should be able to quickly figure it out. If you are just starting out, you might like to try assessing reports about biographies or schools – they are pretty easy as the issues are usually quite obvious. Any help you can give today (or any day for that matter) is greatly appreciated. Thank you! — Diannaa (talk) 19:27, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Recently you said I was in violation of copyright in something while editing Dost Mohammad Khan. I am a bit confused on what I violated specifically, and what parts were removed specifically. Do you mind elaborating so I could re-write said parts if possible, and what was in violation? Thanks. Noorullah (talk) 01:29, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

It was also said in your revert that it was "copied from" the book, which I assume would mean quite literally copy pasting. But that is not what I have done whatsoever when editing the page. Hope we can hash out the details so I can focus on re-writing what part specifically was removed, (as I can't see past revisions of what you removed on the page), or if this was possibly a misunderstanding. Noorullah (talk) 01:31, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Your addition was flagged as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what was found by the detection service. When I checked manually I found some additional content in several locations in our article that was copied from that source, and had to be removed. I am sending you the deleted content via email. — Diannaa (talk) 12:41, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Best practice for attributing public domain sources.

I recently got flagged for copying material from a public domain source on AN/SPG-55 without attribution. There was an attribution directly below the References section (based on the example given from WP:FREECOPY of Western Allied invasion of Germany), but perhaps that wasn't direct enough. What's the current best practice for placing attributions like that? I know there are several different citation methods floating around depending on the age of the Wikipedia page in question, so I'm not sure what the current method is. AN.FSQ-7 (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Sorry for not noticing the attribution template at the bottom of the article. That was a mistake on my part. That's an acceptable way to provide the attribution, but a casual observer might not realise that "NAVEDTRA 10277" is actually the same document as the one cited in what is currently citation #5. So for that reason, my personal preference is to use an inline attribution template in most instances. It also identifies which particular parts of our article contain the copied content. — Diannaa (talk) 18:34, 19 February 2023 (UTC)

Possible plagiarism issue

Hello Diannaa. Hope you're doing well. Sorry to bother you - I'm pretty sure this addition (with the exception of the quoted texts) [13] is plagiarism, as it was previously admitted here [14], yet was added regardless, with no effort made to fix it in the sandbox which it was copied from.

Text from the book;

  • "Another 500-line text describes with pride his conquest of the rest of Commagene and Urartu's complete triumph over Assyria in Mannai. Between Isoglu and Kumu-han on the left bank of the Euuphrates, an inscription gives details of Sarduri's conquest and occupation of Malatya. The Vannic texts furnish us with a complete list of Milidian kings from the time of Menua of Urartu to Sarduri II. The contemporary of Sarduri II was Khila-ruada II (whom Sarduri must have rendered tributary before the year 743 BC) and his successor, King Sulumal. Like so many other Urartian inscriptions, this too is damaged. It dramatically describes the manner in which, after offering a prayer to the mighty god Khaldi, King Sarduri successfully invaded the country of Malatya, capturing 108 cities, numerous places, fortresses and villages."

Text added to the article;

  • "His conquest of the remainder of Commagene and Urartu's complete victory over Assyria in Mannai are proudly described in a second 500-line tablet. An inscription on the left bank of the Euphrates, between Isoglu and Kumu-han, describes Sarduri's capture and occupation of Malatya. We have a comprehensive list of Milidian kings from Menua of Urartu through Sarduri II thanks to the Urartian texts. Khila-ruada II, who must have paid tribute to Sarduri II before the year 743 BC, and king Sulumal were his contemporaries. This is also ruined, just like so many other Urartian inscriptions. It vividly depicts how king Sarduri successfully conquered Malatya, capturing 108 cities, numerous places, fortresses and villages, after making a prayer to the great god Khaldi."

I was also wondering what copyright tool(s) do you use to detect this kind of stuff? I only know of https://copyvios.toolforge.org/, though it isn't the best. Bests. HistoryofIran (talk) 00:46, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

It looks like plagiarism to me too. Please go ahead and remove it and let the editor know what they did wrong. https://copyvios.toolforge.org/ is our primary tool, but you can't use it to look inside books. — Diannaa (talk) 02:16, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Grnčarica Monastery

Hi. Hate to bug you, so you know it's about Copyvio stuff. I got this earwig report on the above article, which links to this website. The website says the stuff was posted 2-3 years ago, and the page does contain a copyright notice. But something doesn't feel right here. Thoughts? Onel5969 TT me 16:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

It's a Google translate of the article on the Serbian Wikipedia sr:Манастир Грнчарица. I will do the attribution etc — Diannaa (talk) 16:12, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to check, much appreciated. Onel5969 TT me 20:55, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
Thank You for your help on Eugene Mattioli Apostolicus (talk) 16:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

Kristina Karamo

Was slapping the huge banner on this page really necessary when you could've just removed the two relevant paragraphs (neither of which are particularly long or even that original)? I'd be happy to rewrite the relevant content but don't want to go through the tedious bureaucracy required by the copyright problems process to do so. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:55, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Listing as WP:CP gives interested editors a week minimum to do the re-write, so in that sense it's a less disruptive method than removal and revision deletion, which is the other option. If there's a viable rewrite available before the week is up, I will gladly take advantage of that. — Diannaa (talk) 20:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Demographics of Russia

I want you to tell me that it is copyright, because you all are getting to the point that everything on Wikipedia is copyright, mentioning how many children a politician has on Wikipedia based on a reference that said so, is doing the same vandalism as me, placing data from That the population of Russia fell by half from such a year to such a year, that is not copyright, it is only true information, I ask if people can publish only some on wikipedia that comply with the same way of seeing things, without touching other topics , and with the same political vision, is that it? asked. All joined so I don't edit?. And answer me because the other user blocks what I do and does not answer me--BrugesFR (talk) 23:36, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what was found by the detection service. This prose contains enough creative original content to qualify for copyright protection, and it is therefore not okay to add it to Wikipedia. To do so it a violation of our copyright policy. I visited your talk page, and that led me to do copyright cleanup on two articles that were mentioned there as having been nominated for G12 speedy deletion: Convent of Santo Domingo, Arequipa and Casa del Cabildo (Cartagena, Colombia). Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia. — Diannaa (talk) 23:45, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Tell me Diannaa how can I post that info without assuming it's copyright? Placing the numbers as words, im very glad to want to know?--BrugesFR (talk) 23:43, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry for say that, Its I've been trying all the week to get those things published on Wikipedia without them being copyright.--BrugesFR (talk) 23:45, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

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) 23:46, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Ok I'll try it, thank you very much for the help.--BrugesFR (talk) 23:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

To write the same information but as I can I will write with my own words but I am not very good at writing things, I will try to do it as I can.--BrugesFR (talk) 23:52, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

If you can't do it you cannot edit here and will likely get blocked from editing, so sorry. — Diannaa (talk) 23:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)

Let me know when you are going to delete the information of an article since you did not leave anything, you deleted everything, these historical buildings seem to be buildings created last year with those blank articles, references, photos and everything you erased, and a lot of information that was not copyright--BrugesFR (talk) 00:00, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Facts cannot be copyrighted. But that's not what is happening here. You are copying someone else's work and passing it off as your own. That's a violation of our copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 00:04, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

how good any ordinary person must be, those who created the millions of articles, giving opinions on the subject and doing all because even a simple phrase, no matter how small it may seem is copyright, that is this is exaggerated. It seems to me that the articles of French churches do not say more than what they should say, the same as in my articles.--BrugesFR (talk) 00:14, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Creating original prose is very difficult. I am grateful we have so many that can do it well. — Diannaa (talk) 00:32, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

Let's get to work, I'm going to write it as it is required, but with the same details, I'm not going to leave it blank, but I think you are going to start blank hundreds of articles and editions.--BrugesFR (talk) 00:26, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry if my conversation seems a bit pedantic to you, I have few problems with autism, but I want to raise things cordially, the problem does not take away my right to work outside or write on Wikipedia.--BrugesFR (talk) 00:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I already rewrote this article with my own words, how could I, what do you think? is approved? Casa del Cabildo (Cartagena, Colombia).--BrugesFR (talk) 00:56, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

I ask you very importantly to let me know when you are going to delete some information so that I can try to fix it, I ask you to notify me--BrugesFR (talk) 01:02, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

In Demographics of Russia#Fertility, I already solved, I added everything with my own words.--BrugesFR (talk) 02:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

You actually have four comments/questions. Regarding your first comment where you say we are going to go through all your additions and clean them up, that's exactly what will happen if the request for a copyright investigation is approved.
Regarding Casa del Cabildo (Cartagena, Colombia): I have reworked one sentence to remove some material copied from the source.
Regarding Demographics of Russia: Your edits at 04:47 and at 18:26 on February 19 both had enough overlap that the detection service reported them at CopyPatrol. The third attempt at 02:17 is acceptable.
I am not required to notify you before I remove copyright content. Every single Wikipedia page has an edit notice that states " Content that violates any copyrights will be deleted." It doesn't say that the patrolling admin is required to notify anybody prior to removal or to discuss with the editor before removing. In fact there is seldom time to do that, as there's typically 75 to 100 items daily to investigate at CopyPatrol alone, as well as several other noticeboards and projects where we do copyright cleanup. There's only a handful of people working on this task. — Diannaa (talk) 13:14, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Update for talk page watchers: BrugesFR has now been blocked by MoneyTrees for violations of the copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 14:47, 22 February 2023 (UTC)

English Patriot Man

Abdul Akter is almost certainly English Patriot Man: see edits to Elvis, Rassenschande, various Nazi topics. Beyond My Ken (talk) 08:43, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

The analysis is here. Note tell-tales such as Kylie Minogue, female singers, Enoch Powell, British politicians, and the general interest in people named "Elvis". I've deleted as many of their edits as I could and marked their user pages as "suspected". Beyond My Ken (talk) 09:40, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
I agree, after seeing some additional evidence in their contribs. Per WP:Beans will not reveal here what I detected. Blocked, tagged. Thanks for your work on this case. — Diannaa (talk) 13:27, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
And thank you for the block. Beyond My Ken (talk) 21:14, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your continued vigilance and continuing to watch out for this LTA after all this time. Much appreciated. — Diannaa (talk) 03:44, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Haley hatnote disappearance

Hi, regarding removal of hatnotes in this edit, I’m curious as to why. Cheers, Anythingyouwant (talk) 07:19, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

What hatnotes were removed? I'm not seeing it. — Diannaa (talk) 12:04, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Oh I see it now and remember. I removed one copy of the hatnote because it's a duplicate. There's still two hats that point to Political positions of Nikki Haley. It just seemed silly to have so many. — Diannaa (talk) 12:12, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
There’s basically a subsection about political positions in each section about a stage of her career, so I put the same hatnote in each of those subsections….mainly for people who don’t read the article straight through but rather jump around. How about if we leave it as-is for now, but maybe I’ll put them back later if it looks like it would help? I think you removed one hatnote in the U.N. Ambassador section, and another in the 2024 campaign section. Anythingyouwant (talk) 15:22, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
It's not important, it just looked like over-linking to me. Please go ahead and do whatever you think is best. — Diannaa (talk) 15:47, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Moin moin

Hi, regarding to the moin moin edits i made, I just want to know if I can still make another edit. with reliable sources this time. Zmu'az4Z (talk) 12:30, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

It's okay to add content as long as you cite your sources. But don't copy text from your sources. Dont' add recipes or ingredient lists copied from elsewhere. — Diannaa (talk) 12:33, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

I have notice that a user is creating a large number of pages some jaw droopingly useless

Hi Diaanaa,

Well I guess my heading says it all. I have notice that a user is creating a large number of pages some jaw droopingly useless. I have been looking for a place where I could learn who to incite votes to delete or re-direct a page. Filmman3000 (talk) 00:30, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

We don't incite votes; that's called canvassing, and is not allowed. The place to nominate articles for deletion is WP:AFD. — Diannaa (talk) 11:46, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Diannaa/Archive_86&oldid=1147259096"