User talk:LegalResearch345 2

Welcome!

Hi LegalResearch345 2! I noticed your contributions to Corky Lee and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Wareon (talk) 14:40, 1 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dora Fugh Lee moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Dora Fugh Lee, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Aoyoigian (talk) 08:08, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dora Fugh Lee (May 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

This submission appears to be taken from https://www.chineseamericanmuseum.org/dorafughlee. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure. Note to reviewers: do not leave copyright violations sitting in the page history. Please follow the instructions here.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

Draft:Dora Fugh Lee may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

- Rich^T|C|E-Mail 00:05, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LegalResearch345 2! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! - Rich^T|C|E-Mail 00:05, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Draft:Dora Fugh Lee has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Deb (talk) 06:54, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote

..."how do I return to my draft to see where you say we are violating copyrights of the Chinese American Museum? We are the ones primarily editing this page. Did we borrow too much text from our own web page? Is this just deleted permanently or can we continue to improve this article in order to get this notable Chinese American's page visible?"

There are several problems here. First of all, you keep saying "we". That suggests there is more than one person using this account, which is not allowed: see Wikipedia:Username_policy#Shared_accounts. You also imply that you work at or represent the Chinese American Museum, which means you have an undeclared conflict of interest: see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Finally, "trying to get a page visible" is another way of saying you are trying to promote them: see Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion. It doesn't mean you can't write about the topic but you must follow all guidelines. I already referred you to Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials, so maybe you should read that again. Deb (talk) 09:20, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I only meant "we" as a "me" as part of the Chinese American community trying to tell the history of an underrepresented group. I would not categorize that as "promotion." I do work for the museum, but I'm writing this article as an individual historian, not to promote any organization.

I understand that the content of this draft was too similar to that particular web page. I wrote the content on that page, so I was not thinking it was borrowed ... but your point is understood! Lesson learned. So is my previous draft with all of my researched references and sources lost forever? LegalResearch345 2 (talk) 12:54, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not exactly, but because so much of it was copied from the website, it would be advisable to start again. It would be difficult and time-consuming for me to separate the wheat from the chaff. Alternatively, you could follow the instructions for donating copyright materials. Deb (talk) 14:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree! I will start over with fresh material, but I mostly want to get the references/sources that I collected in that draft. Thanks. LegalResearch345 2 (talk) 16:31, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]