User talk:Christopheroriger

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Christopher Origer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 05:03, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your article has been moved to AfC space[edit]

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Christopheroriger/Priestblock 25487: A Memoir of Dachau : Fr. Jean Bernard has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Priestblock 25487: A Memoir of Dachau : Fr. Jean Bernard, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article. Your draft is waiting for a review by an experienced editor, if you have any questions please ask on our Help Desk! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 05:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Antandarus. Hope you are well. Had to shift focus for a while. Hope to talk more when I can start working on my family history/Luxembourg history and Priestblock again. Talk to you soon. Cheers Christopher Origer 19:14, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Your submission at Articles for creation[edit]

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Priestblock 25487: A Memoir of Dachau : Fr. Jean Bernard.
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the reviewer's talk page

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! -- Eclipsed (talk) (COI Declaration) 11:06, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Christopheroriger, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. 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!

Scholarly use of Information allowed Per TITLE 17 U.S.C.[edit]

Christopher Origer 20:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

JULY 2012[edit]

Title 17 U.S.C Fair Use

One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of “fair use.” The doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair.

The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes The nature of the copyrighted work The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work The distinction between what is fair use and what is infringement in a particular case will not always be clear or easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission. Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.

The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: “quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author’s observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report; reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported.”

Copyright protects the particular way authors have expressed themselves. It does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in a work.

The safest course is to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.

When it is impracticable to obtain permission, you should consider avoiding the use of copyrighted material unless you are confident that the doctrine of fair use would apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine whether a particular use may be considered fair nor advise on possible copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney.

FL-102, Reviewed June 2012 Christopher Origer 20:32, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello again![edit]

Howdy, I'm Nathan2055. I'm sorry you got upset about marking your contribution for deletion. Please don't take it personally. Wikipedia has a policy about copyright violations, it's not my fault. Thank you, Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 21:34, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing Personal. IT's the LAW. And History. Thank you.[edit]

Christopher Origer 21:47, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Manway Please begin to cite US CODE. Just as I have been. Thank you.

Christopher, Wikipedia is a private website. We, the volunteers who edit here, make the policy. There is no need to cite "US CODE". Numerous people are trying to help you; I wish you'd listen to them for a moment.

Clearly you are trying to write an article about a book. I believe the book passes Wikipedia's notability standards. Please look at the article on another book to get some ideas on how this is done. Here is one by Primo Levi -- If_This_Is_a_Man. You could start your article similarly. Here is a suggested opening:

Priestblock 25487 : A Memoir of Dachau, by Father Jean Bernard (originally Pfarrerblock 25487, and translated into English by Deborah Lucas Schneider) is a book about the imprisonment and torture of priests at Dachau before and during the Second World War. Portions of the book were the basis of the 2004 film The Ninth Day, by Volker Schlöndorff.

That's just a suggestion. What you submit needs to look like an encyclopedia article. What's happening is unfortunate -- you're trying to write about a genuinely notable subject, but please don't insult our volunteers or get lost in the copyright minefield. Avoid stepping there -- just write in your own words and all shall be well. Thank you, Antandrus (talk) 22:50, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I know very well WHAT Wikipedia is, Thank you. Yes, I KNOW it passes Wikipedia's Notability standards. I thank you sincerely for your suggestion and action (the data your provided).

Sincerely,

Christopher Christopher Origer 00:08, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Another item I noticed as I was digging: Wikipedia needs an article on the Priestblock. I'm tempted to translate the article from the German Wikipedia. Note that your book (the German version) is first on the list of 'Literatur'. All the best, Antandrus (talk) 00:18, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I really appreciate your help. Kind regards. Christopher ORIGER[edit]

Christopher Origer 00:23, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Antandrus: One more PS. Everything I wrote to begin with WAS MINE. All I had done at one point was to take the beginning of the first Chapter of the book and included that in the Article. Per Title 17 U.S.C. It IS/WAS FAIR SCHOLARLY USE of the DATA. They kept deleting my drafts and my submittals..... Thanks,

Christopher Christopher Origer 00:42, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Look at the use of quotes from the book in another context. How does making a sizeable proportion of the article the opening paragraphs of the book aid the reader in understanding the significance of the book? This is nothing to do with US fair use law but is about relevance. Content from the book only needs to added to illustrate specific points about the book, not the subject of the book. So, for example, if an unusual writing style was used, say written in the second person then a reproduction from the book to illustrate this would be applicable. Remember this is an encyclopaedia article about the book not an advertisement for it or a review of the book. I want to know about the book, what it covers, why it is significant but I don't want to read the book itself. NtheP (talk) 04:19, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Priestblock 25487: A Memoir of Dachau : Fr. Jean Bernard concern[edit]

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Priestblock 25487: A Memoir of Dachau : Fr. Jean Bernard, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 180 days. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 13:54, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your article submission Priestblock 25487: A Memoir of Dachau : Fr. Jean Bernard[edit]

Hello Christopheroriger. It has been over six months since you last edited your article submission, entitled Priestblock 25487: A Memoir of Dachau : Fr. Jean Bernard.

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Priestblock 25487: A Memoir of Dachau : Fr. Jean Bernard}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 17:02, 28 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Christopheroriger/sandbox[edit]

If this is the first article that you have 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.

A tag has been placed on User:Christopheroriger/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.atlantissolar.com/aboutus.html. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely 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.

It is a draft which has not been edited in over six months. (See section G13 of the criteria for speedy deletion.)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 04:56, 23 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]