User talk:Woolstation

CS1 error on A. G. Sulzberger

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page A. G. Sulzberger, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 14:34, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

A belated welcome!

Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Woolstation! I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may still benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:

Need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Again, welcome! CLYDE ^{TALK TO ME}/_{STUFF DONE} 21:47, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kristen Kosmas moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Kristen Kosmas. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ... discospinster _talk 22:54, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MJ Kaufman moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to MJ Kaufman. Unfortunately, it is not ready for publishing because it needs more sources to establish notability and relies on primary sources. Your article is now a draft where you can improve it undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. ... discospinster _talk 23:01, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright violation for Azure D Osborne-Lee

Your edit to Azure D Osborne-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. Significa liberdade (talk) 02:35, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: MJ Kaufman (September 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Utopes was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The subject does not appear to be notable based on Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Notability is established when the subject receives significant coverage from reliable, independent sources, beyond what is considered routine. The subject's personal website should not be used as a source, and reviews are usually not considered reliable either.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:MJ Kaufman and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:28, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Woolstation! 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! Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 05:28, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agnes Borinsky moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Agnes Borinsky, 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. Maliner (talk) 10:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kate Manheim has been accepted

Kate Manheim, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Spinster300 (talk) 16:33, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:MJ Kaufman

Hello, Woolstation. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:MJ Kaufman, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 06:06, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Agnes Borinsky

Hello, Woolstation. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Agnes Borinsky".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 14:06, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Kristen Kosmas

Hello, Woolstation. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Kristen Kosmas, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:06, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Your edit to Draft:Susie Tennant 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 information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. 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. — Diannaa (talk) 14:38, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

CS1 error on Nature Theater of Oklahoma

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Nature Theater of Oklahoma, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 22:15, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

June 2024

Hello, I'm Swatjester. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person on Eric André, but you didn't support your changes with a citation to a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now. Wikipedia has a very strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate and clear. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you! ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 21:15, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add contentious categories like "Jewish American anti-zionists" to articles that make no claim whether the person is an antizionist. Per WP:BLPCAT, the case for each content category must be made clear by the article text and its verifiable reliable sources. ⇒SWATJester ^{Shoot Blues, Tell VileRat!} 21:17, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to Howard Brown Health 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 information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. 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. This is your third warning. — Diannaa (talk) 13:22, 29 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for June 28

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Mariame Kaba, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Kelly Hayes. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, --DPL bot (talk) 18:46, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Your edit to Uptown People's Law Center 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 information on how to contribute your work appropriately. For legal reasons, Wikipedia strictly cannot host copyrighted text or images from print media or digital platforms without an appropriate and verifiable license. Contributions infringing on copyright will be removed. 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. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:17, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:25, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 48 hours for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 22:33, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Uptown People's Law Center moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Uptown People's Law Center. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:41, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago Freedom School moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Chicago Freedom School. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:45, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Draft:Uptown People's Law Center

If this was the first article that you created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

The page Draft:Uptown People's Law Center has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appeared to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appeared to be a direct copy from https://www.mcdowellfoundation.org/grantees/uptown-peoples-law-center. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition has been be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, you may contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you may open a discussion at Wikipedia:Deletion review. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:05, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for violating copyright policy by copying text or images into Wikipedia from another source without evidence of permission. Please take this opportunity to ensure that you understand our copyright policy and our policies regarding how to use non-free content.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Woolstation (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Woolstation (talk) 15:47, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

In order to lift the block, we need to be certain that you understand how copyright works on Wikipedia. To allow the reviewing administrator to assess your understanding, please respond to the following questions in your next unblock appeal, explaining in your own words:

What is copyright?
How is Wikipedia licenced?
Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?
Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?
How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?

Your answers will enable us to establish whether or not you should be unblocked. Yamla (talk) 16:34, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I would like to request a reversal of my permanent suspension. I understand that the issue is that I had three instances of copyright violations, the most recent being that I created an article for Uptown People's Law Center whose text was too close to a journalistic article source. To be honest, I am new to Wikipedia and had not been looking at my Talk page, so I did not see the previous flags. I believe the issue in all three of these cases has been introducing text that was too close to a source. I appreciate that copyright violations are a serious issue, as they threaten Wikipedia's institutional integrity. My intentions here have not been malicious or willfully careless. These were honest mistakes; I didn't realize what the standard was for how different text had to be from a source, and I didn't see the flags until today. I now appreciate (1) the importance of not introducing text that is close in content, phrasing, and flow of information from a source, and (2) checking my Talk page regularly to get guidance from other users. Again, I did not intend to violate these regulations, and am committed to not making similar mistakes in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Woolstation (talk • contribs) 11:47, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright problem: Kate Manheim

Hello Woolstation! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Kate Manheim, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from https://whitecolumns.org/exhibitions/kate-manheim/ https://cueartfoundation.org/kate-manheim/, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License (CC BY-SA 4.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:Kate Manheim and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-enwikimedia.org". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Kate Manheim, in their email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Kate Manheim. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA), version 4.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Kate Manheim with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

See Wikipedia:Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Kate Manheim saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 21:32, 6 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Matir Asurim for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Matir Asurim is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matir Asurim until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 01:13, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Request for unblock

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

Woolstation (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

This is in response to user @Yamla's response to my initial request to have my account unblocked in July 2024.

Fair enough! Here are my answers to these questions.

What is copyright? Copyright is legal ownership of intellectual property, which includes but is not limited to: original text, images, music, and other proprietary material such as patented inventions or software. The creator of a copyrighted work owns the sole right to reproduce or distribute that work, in whole or in part, regardless of whether such distribution is for profit or not.

How is Wikipedia licenced? Wikipedia is licensed automatically under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the international legal framework that has governed copyright law since the 19th century. Technically, text on Wikipedia is copyrighted by its contributors and then licensed to the public, although in practical effect editors cannot make copyright claims on text they publish on Wikipedia, as the public already has permission to duplicate and modify it, provided they follow licensing rules. The two main licenses used are the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL).

CC BY-SA 4.0 includes these rules and guidelines: anyone is free to share/copy/distribute or adapt/change/build upon material from Wikipedia/Wikimedia, as long as they follow these 3 rules: attribution (give credit and cite where you got the information; indicate if you made any changes; do not claim that the original creator endorses your particular use of the material); share alike (if you change the material, you must still distribute your version under the same license as the original); no additional restrictions (similar to last rule; you may not put material taken or adapted from Wikipedia/Wikimedia under a different license or copyright from the original). These rules do not apply to material that was already in the public domain before it was added to Wikipedia/Wikimedia, or to material that is under a different copyright and was improperly uploaded to Wikipedia/Wikimedia. In the first case, no licensing restrictions apply; in the second case, the person should reach out to the work's original creator or current copyright holder.

The GFDL is the older license that all of Wikipedia was under prior to 2009. The basic principle of the GFDL is that anyone may copy or distribute the material, but may not alter it in any way.

Wikipedia editors must ensure that all material added to Wikipedia is licensable under CC BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL. Because text on Wikipedia can be edited, users may not add material that is only licensable under GFDL.

It is permitted to add your original works to Wikipedia/Wikimedia as long as you do not retain any copyright to them.

In the case of images, my understanding is that there are some other licenses that may be used, but the basic principle is that you may only upload images that are (a) public domain or (b) your original work, which you have not copyrighted.

Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?

Copyrighted content is not allowed on Wikipedia because, in order for Wikipedia to continue to operate as a legal U.S. based organization, it must abide by United States copyright law. As the current legal battle over the Internet Archive makes clear, improper use of copyrighted material, even when not for profit, jeopardizes the survival of Wikipedia as an enterprise.

Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?

Under certain very specific circumstances, copyrighted content can be used on Wikipedia under “fair use.” For example, you can include short direct quotations from an article or a piece of writing in the body of a Wikipedia page, as long as the quotation is clearly marked and properly cited.

How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?

The way that I got into trouble here was by taking text directly from articles, changing it only minimally in order to fit into the flow of the paragraph, and putting it directly into a Wikipedia page. I now understand that this is improper use of copyrighted material. In the future, if I want to include information from an article, I will (a) rewrite the ideas in the article fully in my own words, (b) occasionally include brief, clearly marked quotations when necessary, and (c) properly cite all quotations and ideas.

I hope this is a satisfactory answer to your questions. I believe in the principles of Wikipedia, and am sincerely committed to following copyright guidelines in the future.

Notes:

In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=This is in response to user @[[User:Yamla|Yamla]]'s response to my initial request to have my account unblocked in July 2024. 

'''Fair enough! Here are my answers to these questions.'''

'''What is copyright?'''
Copyright is legal ownership of intellectual property, which includes but is not limited to: original text, images, music, and other proprietary material such as patented inventions or software. The creator of a copyrighted work owns the sole right to reproduce or distribute that work, in whole or in part, regardless of whether such distribution is for profit or not. 

'''How is Wikipedia licenced?'''
Wikipedia is licensed automatically under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the international legal framework that has governed copyright law since the 19th century. Technically, text on Wikipedia is copyrighted by its contributors and then licensed to the public, although in practical effect editors cannot make copyright claims on text they publish on Wikipedia, as the public already has permission to duplicate and modify it, provided they follow licensing rules. The two main licenses used are the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). 

CC BY-SA 4.0 includes these rules and guidelines: anyone is free to share/copy/distribute or adapt/change/build upon material from Wikipedia/Wikimedia, as long as they follow these 3 rules: attribution (give credit and cite where you got the information; indicate if you made any changes; do not claim that the original creator endorses your particular use of the material); share alike (if you change the material, you must still distribute your version under the same license as the original); no additional restrictions (similar to last rule; you may not put material taken or adapted from Wikipedia/Wikimedia under a different license or copyright from the original). These rules do not apply to material that was already in the public domain before it was added to Wikipedia/Wikimedia, or to material that is under a different copyright and was improperly uploaded to Wikipedia/Wikimedia. In the first case, no licensing restrictions apply; in the second case, the person should reach out to the work's original creator or current copyright holder. 

The GFDL is the older license that all of Wikipedia was under prior to 2009. The basic principle of the GFDL is that anyone may copy or distribute the material, but may not alter it in any way. 

Wikipedia editors must ensure that all material added to Wikipedia is licensable under CC BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL. Because text on Wikipedia can be edited, users may not add material that is only licensable under GFDL. 

It is permitted to add your original works to Wikipedia/Wikimedia as long as you do not retain any copyright to them. 

In the case of images, my understanding is that there are some other licenses that may be used, but the basic principle is that you may only upload images that are (a) public domain or (b) your original work, which you have not copyrighted. 

'''Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?'''

Copyrighted content is not allowed on Wikipedia because, in order for Wikipedia to continue to operate as a legal U.S. based organization, it must abide by United States copyright law. As the current legal battle over the Internet Archive makes clear, improper use of copyrighted material, even when not for profit, jeopardizes the survival of Wikipedia as an enterprise. 

'''Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?'''

Under certain very specific circumstances, copyrighted content can be used on Wikipedia under “fair use.” For example, you can include short direct quotations from an article or a piece of writing in the body of a Wikipedia page, as long as the quotation is clearly marked and properly cited. 

'''How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?'''

The way that I got into trouble here was by taking text directly from articles, changing it only minimally in order to fit into the flow of the paragraph, and putting it directly into a Wikipedia page. I now understand that this is improper use of copyrighted material. In the future, if I want to include information from an article, I will (a) rewrite the ideas in the article fully in my own words, (b) occasionally include brief, clearly marked quotations when necessary, and (c) properly cite all quotations and ideas. 

I hope this is a satisfactory answer to your questions. I believe in the principles of Wikipedia, and am sincerely committed to following copyright guidelines in the future. 
 |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=This is in response to user @[[User:Yamla|Yamla]]'s response to my initial request to have my account unblocked in July 2024. 

'''Fair enough! Here are my answers to these questions.'''

'''What is copyright?'''
Copyright is legal ownership of intellectual property, which includes but is not limited to: original text, images, music, and other proprietary material such as patented inventions or software. The creator of a copyrighted work owns the sole right to reproduce or distribute that work, in whole or in part, regardless of whether such distribution is for profit or not. 

'''How is Wikipedia licenced?'''
Wikipedia is licensed automatically under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the international legal framework that has governed copyright law since the 19th century. Technically, text on Wikipedia is copyrighted by its contributors and then licensed to the public, although in practical effect editors cannot make copyright claims on text they publish on Wikipedia, as the public already has permission to duplicate and modify it, provided they follow licensing rules. The two main licenses used are the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). 

CC BY-SA 4.0 includes these rules and guidelines: anyone is free to share/copy/distribute or adapt/change/build upon material from Wikipedia/Wikimedia, as long as they follow these 3 rules: attribution (give credit and cite where you got the information; indicate if you made any changes; do not claim that the original creator endorses your particular use of the material); share alike (if you change the material, you must still distribute your version under the same license as the original); no additional restrictions (similar to last rule; you may not put material taken or adapted from Wikipedia/Wikimedia under a different license or copyright from the original). These rules do not apply to material that was already in the public domain before it was added to Wikipedia/Wikimedia, or to material that is under a different copyright and was improperly uploaded to Wikipedia/Wikimedia. In the first case, no licensing restrictions apply; in the second case, the person should reach out to the work's original creator or current copyright holder. 

The GFDL is the older license that all of Wikipedia was under prior to 2009. The basic principle of the GFDL is that anyone may copy or distribute the material, but may not alter it in any way. 

Wikipedia editors must ensure that all material added to Wikipedia is licensable under CC BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL. Because text on Wikipedia can be edited, users may not add material that is only licensable under GFDL. 

It is permitted to add your original works to Wikipedia/Wikimedia as long as you do not retain any copyright to them. 

In the case of images, my understanding is that there are some other licenses that may be used, but the basic principle is that you may only upload images that are (a) public domain or (b) your original work, which you have not copyrighted. 

'''Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?'''

Copyrighted content is not allowed on Wikipedia because, in order for Wikipedia to continue to operate as a legal U.S. based organization, it must abide by United States copyright law. As the current legal battle over the Internet Archive makes clear, improper use of copyrighted material, even when not for profit, jeopardizes the survival of Wikipedia as an enterprise. 

'''Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?'''

Under certain very specific circumstances, copyrighted content can be used on Wikipedia under “fair use.” For example, you can include short direct quotations from an article or a piece of writing in the body of a Wikipedia page, as long as the quotation is clearly marked and properly cited. 

'''How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?'''

The way that I got into trouble here was by taking text directly from articles, changing it only minimally in order to fit into the flow of the paragraph, and putting it directly into a Wikipedia page. I now understand that this is improper use of copyrighted material. In the future, if I want to include information from an article, I will (a) rewrite the ideas in the article fully in my own words, (b) occasionally include brief, clearly marked quotations when necessary, and (c) properly cite all quotations and ideas. 

I hope this is a satisfactory answer to your questions. I believe in the principles of Wikipedia, and am sincerely committed to following copyright guidelines in the future. 
 |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=This is in response to user @[[User:Yamla|Yamla]]'s response to my initial request to have my account unblocked in July 2024. 

'''Fair enough! Here are my answers to these questions.'''

'''What is copyright?'''
Copyright is legal ownership of intellectual property, which includes but is not limited to: original text, images, music, and other proprietary material such as patented inventions or software. The creator of a copyrighted work owns the sole right to reproduce or distribute that work, in whole or in part, regardless of whether such distribution is for profit or not. 

'''How is Wikipedia licenced?'''
Wikipedia is licensed automatically under the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, the international legal framework that has governed copyright law since the 19th century. Technically, text on Wikipedia is copyrighted by its contributors and then licensed to the public, although in practical effect editors cannot make copyright claims on text they publish on Wikipedia, as the public already has permission to duplicate and modify it, provided they follow licensing rules. The two main licenses used are the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-SA 4.0) and the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL). 

CC BY-SA 4.0 includes these rules and guidelines: anyone is free to share/copy/distribute or adapt/change/build upon material from Wikipedia/Wikimedia, as long as they follow these 3 rules: attribution (give credit and cite where you got the information; indicate if you made any changes; do not claim that the original creator endorses your particular use of the material); share alike (if you change the material, you must still distribute your version under the same license as the original); no additional restrictions (similar to last rule; you may not put material taken or adapted from Wikipedia/Wikimedia under a different license or copyright from the original). These rules do not apply to material that was already in the public domain before it was added to Wikipedia/Wikimedia, or to material that is under a different copyright and was improperly uploaded to Wikipedia/Wikimedia. In the first case, no licensing restrictions apply; in the second case, the person should reach out to the work's original creator or current copyright holder. 

The GFDL is the older license that all of Wikipedia was under prior to 2009. The basic principle of the GFDL is that anyone may copy or distribute the material, but may not alter it in any way. 

Wikipedia editors must ensure that all material added to Wikipedia is licensable under CC BY-SA 4.0 and GFDL. Because text on Wikipedia can be edited, users may not add material that is only licensable under GFDL. 

It is permitted to add your original works to Wikipedia/Wikimedia as long as you do not retain any copyright to them. 

In the case of images, my understanding is that there are some other licenses that may be used, but the basic principle is that you may only upload images that are (a) public domain or (b) your original work, which you have not copyrighted. 

'''Why is copyrighted content not allowed on Wikipedia?'''

Copyrighted content is not allowed on Wikipedia because, in order for Wikipedia to continue to operate as a legal U.S. based organization, it must abide by United States copyright law. As the current legal battle over the Internet Archive makes clear, improper use of copyrighted material, even when not for profit, jeopardizes the survival of Wikipedia as an enterprise. 

'''Under what circumstances can we use copyrighted content?'''

Under certain very specific circumstances, copyrighted content can be used on Wikipedia under “fair use.” For example, you can include short direct quotations from an article or a piece of writing in the body of a Wikipedia page, as long as the quotation is clearly marked and properly cited. 

'''How do you intend to avoid violating the copyright policy in the future?'''

The way that I got into trouble here was by taking text directly from articles, changing it only minimally in order to fit into the flow of the paragraph, and putting it directly into a Wikipedia page. I now understand that this is improper use of copyrighted material. In the future, if I want to include information from an article, I will (a) rewrite the ideas in the article fully in my own words, (b) occasionally include brief, clearly marked quotations when necessary, and (c) properly cite all quotations and ideas. 

I hope this is a satisfactory answer to your questions. I believe in the principles of Wikipedia, and am sincerely committed to following copyright guidelines in the future. 
 |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

Woolstation (talk) 19:34, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Woolstation, this is an acceptable unblock request, thank you. However, a quick check of some of your past contributions shows that there are further copyright problems among them. I checked three drafts mentioned on this page and found evidence of copying in all three: Draft:MJ Kaufman, Draft:Agnes Borinsky (very minor) and Draft:Chicago Freedom School (one sentence). Would you please review all your past contributions (which fortunately are not many), and list here on this page any that included content copied from the sources, whether or not that content is still in the page? You will find this tool useful. Once that's done and dealt with I'll go ahead and unblock your account, on the strict understanding that there'll be no more problems of this kind. Thank you, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:42, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I should have noticed earlier the small remaining copyvio at Draft:Chicago Freedom School – my apologies! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 09:47, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]