User talk:Diannaa/Archive 71

Archive 65

←

Archive 69

Archive 70

Archive 71

Archive 72

Archive 73

→

Archive 75

Copyright problem on 474th Tactical Fighter Wing

Diannaa, Thanks for the feedback. I'm new at this and thought if I referenced the source I could reproduce it. I will rewrite it and reference the source. Aardvarkrocket (talk) 21:04, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Aardvarkrocket, Hello, you can take a look WP:COPYVIO. Thanks Megan Barris (Lets talk📧) 06:34, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

AN OTRS inquiry relayed to Copyright

@MER-C and Moneytrees: Wikimedia received an inquiry via OTRS involving this edit

You are probably aware that we treat OTRS inquiries as confidential, so I can't say much more at this time. I have requested permission to share more information, and normally I would've waited for that response before contacting you, but I see the copy patrol is currently halted so it seems like a good time to ask a copyright question.

As you can see, some of the material in that edit is attributed to this site. however, while properly attributed, it isn't written in the editors own words, it is a straight copy from the source material, which is clearly a problem.

I don't really need your help in determining whether there is a violation of copyright policy, there clearly is. I do have a couple of questions:

Some editors, when seeing material exactly matching a source, will suggest to the editor that they should look into getting the copyright holder to license the relevant text. I've done that on occasion, but I don't do it as a matter of course. It's my opinion that some copyright holders, notably owners of museums and some other nonprofit organizations do an acceptable level of writing about a subject in a neutral way, so that if we could cure the copyright problem, the text would be appropriate for Wikipedia. However, it is my observation that many corporations write material that is understandably intended to burnish their own image, and might be acceptable, but often is not sufficiently neutral, so I tend not to encourage the editor to investigate that option. This is leading up to an obvious question — do you have views on when it is appropriate to suggest such an option, and you think this particular situation qualifies?

As a second question, I know some editors are reticent to do revision deletions when it wipes out a substantial portion of the history. The good thing about copy patrol is we typically catch things fairly early. This edit is over a year old, and revision deletions would hide two thirds of the edit history. I think that's necessary but I'd like some feedback on whether you think this should be treated as an exception, and if so how.

As my third question, while this edit is over a year old, it obviously occurred well after copy patrol was established. Do you have any thoughts on why this might not have been picked up by copy patrol? I realize we have occasional outages, and I'm not completely clear whether turning copy patrol back on picks up at the time of the outage or at the time it is restarted, so one possibility is that this edit slipped through during an outage. Another possibility is that it didn't get picked up for some other reason, and should be shared with the copy patrol developers to see if it's a one-off issue worth ignoring, or helps identify needed tweaks to the software. Any thoughts?--S Philbrick(Talk) 19:06, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Don't even bother trying to clear permission for promotional text. My default action for dealing with promotional articles at WP:CP is deletion. I may also block indefinitely the copyvio adder depending on how badly promotional the text is or whether I suspect they are a WP:UPE spammer. If text does not belong in an encyclopedia for other reasons, you shouldn't permission clear it either because it will be removed.

I just obliterated the entire edit history of several foundational copyvios. The question is materiality, and the threshold is subjective. MER-C 19:15, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Some of the claims such as "the world's first organism foundry capable of complete automation of organism strain engineering" require independent sourcing. Allowing wholesale copying of corporate websites is seldom if ever appropriate and often I will not re-add such material even if an OTRS ticket clears it - I will undo the revision deletion but that is all. (The suggestion to get an OTRS ticket is indirectly embedded in both template:uw-copyright and template:uw-copyright-new.) As to how much revision deletion is appropriate, it's a judgement call. I tend to omit doing it at all on heavily edited articles on controversial current events. But for material copied from a corporate website, I would be far more likely to do it, even if it covers quite a bit of time or a lot of edits. I don't know why the CopyPatrol system did not pick up on this particular case. Cases that occur during an outage are not stored anywhere; the bot operates in real-time only. iThenticate sometimes misses obvious stuff that Earwig's tool finds easily; I don't know why. I think I've covered all your questions; if not please let me know.— Diannaa (talk) 20:14, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, Thanks. I didn't know, but I'm not surprised to hear that the bot works in real time only. That's useful to know. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:39, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

MAG Lebanon

Hi there — yesterday you removed some copyvio content from MAG Lebanon, but it has since been added back by an IP editor. As I don't have any rollback etc. rights, could you please return to the article and do your magic again, when you've a spare moment? TIA, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:24, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thank you,— Diannaa (talk) 13:32, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		Thanks for your work! You always beat me to the copyvios :). Best, Signed,The4lines |||| (You Asked?) (What I have Done.) 19:39, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! And thanks for your interest in copyright clean-up.— Diannaa (talk) 00:15, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

linking to sound files on library of Congress website?

Hello Diannaa Could you advise me please? I'm working on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Caruso_discography and I want to include links to sound files (from audio disk records Caruso made early in the 1900s) which are held on the Library of Congress website. From a copyright point of view, would this be permissible? --Thank you for considering. Best wishes. Stuart1900

Yes it would. In addition, the copyright has expired on any recordings made prior to 1925 1923.— Diannaa (talk) 00:13, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

thank you. does that mean that linking to a youtube soundfile of the same pre-1925 1923 disk would also be permissible? user:Stuart1900 —Preceding undated comment added 08:23, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Probably.— Diannaa (talk) 14:43, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you very much. 175.33.167.9 (talk) 12:10, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

—Stuart1900 Stuart1900 (talk) 12:11, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Stuart1900 we have discovered that the rule for sound recordings is different - it has to have been published prior to 1923. Commons:Hirtle chart#Sound recordings. Sorry for the mistake.— Diannaa (talk) 21:53, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Assistance with broken references

Hi Diannaa, about two years ago you removed some copyright violating content from Saint Luke's Health System. Unfortunately this left a bunch of broken references, which I can't fix because I can't see the deleted revisions. Would you be able to repair those references please? —Granger (talk · contribs) 23:04, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Done. Sorry for the mistake, what a mess.— Diannaa (talk) 13:05, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, here's another one with the same situation: Swaran Singh. —Granger (talk · contribs) 22:12, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Found it. Sorry for the mistake.— Diannaa (talk) 22:21, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

No worries, and thanks for cleaning these up! I just encountered two more: Tactical combat casualty care and Takri script. —Granger (talk · contribs) 16:47, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

About a Copyright on Bartholomäus Bruyn.

Hi, i've asked several times about some information on that article, but haven't got any Further coment yet. Thnxs. FydelJ (talk) 23:55, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not know you had left me a message. Answered now.— Diannaa (talk) 13:10, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

That's exactly what i did, i used my own words. I know what copyright is and thats why I ask, if you compared the two texts because it wasn't a copy/past at all. Infact whenever i use a text literally i put quotes with the source on it. In any case if i was copying i woudn't put the source as i did. FydelJ (talk) 16:25, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

FydelJ. Barthel Bruyn the Elder. Your addition:

The Thyssen-Bornemisza Museum in Madrid owns three paintings, a Nativity and two protraits that share the same blue background with a marble ledge and lighting that enters from the left, characteristics that suggest that the two sitters are a man and wife, while the coat-of-arms on the man’s ring, bearing a black trefoil, identifies him as a member of the Weinsberg family.

Source webpage:

They share the same blue background with a marble ledge and lighting that enters from the left. All these characteristics have led to the suggestion that the two sitters are a man and wife, while the coat-of-arms on the man’s ring, bearing a black trefoil, identifies him as a member of the Weinsberg family.

— Diannaa (talk) 19:32, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Exactly, its first, not a copy/paste of the entire text and at the end of the sentence i put the reference of the link with the source. FydelJ (talk) 09:53, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether you cite the source or not. It's almost identical, and thus is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. — Diannaa (talk) 13:45, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

EFU Life

This article should be renamed to EFU Group.

Reference https://www.efulife.com/aboutus/efu-group/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sulaymān Hercules (talk • contribs) 09:15, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Pakistan International Airlines

PIA Head Office being shifted to Islamabad

According to the Aviation Division, the finance and engineering departments and situation room are currently present in Karachi, whereas marketing, procedure bureau, central reservation control, revenue management, HR and security and vigilance department have been shifted to Islamabad.

https://profit.pakistantoday.com.pk/2020/03/04/pia-relocating-its-headquarters-to-islamabad/

I would like you to add the above information to the PIA Wikipedia Page fulfilling all the Wikipedia requirements.

I will research it properly first and see what I can do.

Thank you for your feedback (: Vallentunar (talk) 13:05, 3 July 2020 (UTC)

Pakistan Civil Aviation Authority

A delinking process to distribute Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) into two separate divisions regulatory and service divisions has been started. The new division would be called Airport Services of Pakistan (ASP).[6]

I would like you to add the above information to the PCAA Wikipedia Page fulfilling all the Wikipedia requirements.

https://arynews.tv/en/authorities-start-delinking-process-of-civil-aviation-authority/

EPM?

Do you think that these reports are enough to file an SPI on Maximajorian Viridio (5508 edits) as a possible English Patriot Man sock?

• Comparison with Sein und Veit, the EPM sock with the most edits (749): [1];
• No. 2 sock, Windows66 (617 edits): [2] (note the edits to "Marriage" outside of the normal subject area);
• No. 3, JackRussell962 (335): [3] (note "Sri Lanka");
• No. 4, James Joseph P. Smith (322): [4]

Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:03, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Beyond My Ken, another CU checked a few years ago. Per the CU log, they’re on the wrong continent. Also, hope you and Diannaa are staying safe. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:14, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Tony, thanks for that. Yes, we're doing fine here in NYC, hope all is well with you, and with you Diannaa. Beyond My Ken (talk) 05:16, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Everything is great here, lows case counts and rainy weather. Good to see youse guys.— Diannaa (talk) 14:45, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Check my edits

Hello, I noticed that you tagged 1981 in Bulgaria for speedy deletion for copyright infringement and I appreciate it. I reworded it in my own words so that it shouldn't be infringing anyone's copyright anymore. If there is still an issue with the page, please tell me before deleting it so that I can fix it and possibly save the page. Thank you for notifying me and sorry for the trouble. Best regards, Dantheanimator (talk) 20:10, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Dantheanimator, I am going through your other year-in Bulgaria articles and have found many others with problems so far.— Diannaa (talk) 20:16, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Please tell me the exact issue for each one and I'll fix them. Dantheanimator (talk) 20:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Also, which year pages have issues? Dantheanimator (talk) 20:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

The problem is word-for-word copying from https://www.timelines.ws/countries/BULGARIA.HTML in the "Events" section of the articles. The full list is on your user talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 20:50, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I fixed all the pages you listed. There should be no copyright issues now. Again, very sorry for the trouble. I was grossly unaware that I was violating any copyright and I'll make sure not do repeat the same mistakes again. Thank you for notifying me. Dantheanimator (talk) 20:58, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

All clear now. Thank you for taking the time to do that.— Diannaa (talk) 21:50, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Your message on my talk page

Hello again. I received a message on my talk page regarding my copying of text from one wiki article to another and I greatly appreciate it. You are right, I did copy the text from the article onto the new page. I add the internal link to the article I copy from within the sentence I copied. The specific article you mentioned I re-worded in my own words and gave credit in the edit summary. Again, thank you for informing me about this, I'm still new and learning so any info like this is always welcomed. From now on I'll give credit in my edit summary to whoever I am crediting. If you are looking over the wiki stubs I've made, which it seems you are, I would appreciate it if you actually expanded them and/or improved/edited them to make them better pages instead of solely notifying me of the errors/areas in need of improvement. Also, after I finish making the rest of the missing pages, I plan on going back an expanding/fixing/editing each page greatly, so it is not like each page I make is a final project. I also have to fix the formatting so each page has the same formatting. If you have the time, me and other Wikipedians in and outside the Wikiproject Bulgaria would appreciate it if you dedicated some time to help expand English Wikipedia's coverage of Bulgaria and it's history. Again, thank you for informing me. I'll make sure to give credit to the respective Wikipedians. Also, I noticed that you aren't a member of wikiproject Bulgaria. If you have any expertise that can help us at wikiproject Bulgaria, I strongly urge you to join. You do not have to know how to read cyrillic to join or be Bulgarian/of Bulgarian descent to join. Dantheanimator (talk) 17:13, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi again Dantheanimator. Unfortunately I am too busy with my copyright cleanup work to do much regarding improving articles at this time. — Diannaa (talk) 21:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hessam Abrishami wiki

Hello Diannaa,

All the content on other websites in reference to me, Hessam Abrishami, was written and provided by myself. I am the artist an i hold all the copywrites.

Feel free to contact me should you have any issues.

Hessam Abrishami— Preceding unsigned comment added by Hessam11 (talk • contribs) 17:34, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa (talk) 19:04, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Ragnar Kjartansson (performance artist)

Hello! I believe some revdel is needed at Ragnar Kjartansson (performance artist). Large promotional sections that included copyvio were added by the I8 Gallery (contribs). I removed some material that looked like OR before realizing the copyvio problem (see Earwig on an earlier version). The version to be rolled back to is, I believe, here. While you ar at it, perhaps a promotional username block for that account? They have not edited in years. Thank you!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Cleaned. Thank you for the report. There's no need to block that inactive account unless they resume editing.— Diannaa (talk) 12:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Message from 118mate

Thank you for informing me of the attribution policy re copying from other WP pages. I’ll make sure to add that if it hasn’t been already within a couple days. Best regards, 118mate (talk) 06:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Reverted contributions from editor with short history

Hello, I saw your talk page comment, and wanted to let you know that I was quite unsure how to welcome this user. More importantly, as I wrote here, the user falsified superficially legit-looking source citations to create an apparently well-sourced section detailing a recall of this car due to recent, extensive fires. This seems to be an especially sinister form of abuse of Wikipedia, since it could potentially convince a wide segment of the public that such a fire risk and a recall was present, when it is in fact not. Apart from the revert + photo remove, should further action be taken with regard to this blatant abuse of Wikipedia - which could potentially have been financially motivated? Lklundin (talk) 13:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

The content he added was copied from https://www.theverge.com/2019/6/27/18761067/nio-es8-electric-suv-recall-battery-fires-china and the source they offered was https://www.nio.com/news/nio-announces-voluntary-recall-4803-es8s-battery-safety-concerns. Both of these cover a recall of cars due to fires. So I'm not sure why you are saying he added false information?— Diannaa (talk) 14:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Now I am baffled. Following your links, I do see now the story on the Verge, with the author that I remember as cited yesterday in the now-removed addition. But I swear, yesterday I followed the link and I ended up on the nio.com page without a note on the recall. Maybe this was a mistake on my part, then. In the meantime, all three edits that I undid are now inaccessible via the article history, so I cannot double-check - and if need be self-revert. Is that because it was a verbatim copy of text from the Verge? If so, I guess it can all be explained by an inexperienced editor with no understanding of copyright. If so, I will update my posting on the Talk page. Thanks. Lklundin (talk) 16:36, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Correct, it was verbatim copied from the Verge piece.— Diannaa (talk) 20:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Punjabi Suba movement and Singh Sabha movement

Hi Diannaa, I made the amended edits to the Punjabi Suba movement and Singh Sabha movement articles yesterday. I hope the amendments remedied the problem.

After I made my edit to the Singh Sabha article, another user re-added a large amount of irrelevant content directly lifted from what appears to be an opinion piece from a website that seems based on user submissions (it is linked to in the edit itself). I had previously reverted the same spam on July 2. It appears to have avoided bot detection both times, if there is such a bot. I can't revert it as another edit prevents that and I don't have rollback, so would you mind rolling it back to my version, if there are no issues with it? Thanks. Sapedder (talk) 10:15, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the bad news, it looks like you put quite a bit of work into the new version. But it's not okay to simply substitute a few words while keeping the existing sentence structure and most of the wording. The content has to be completely re-written in your own words.

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) 20:17, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, I have reviewed the links. In regards to the Punjabi Suba edit (I will focus on the other edit after this one is concluded), I have again been redrafting and summarizing the edit to make it more suitable. But I also don't think that the bulk of the revisions I made previously were simply cosmetic, and I approached the edit with some conservatism, as I neither wanted to omit details, nor reword phrases in a way that would either change the meaning too much, introduce spin, or sound stilted or unencyclopedic. I also don't know how much more the edit can be shrunk (though it should be noticeably smaller now), or how much more I can shuffle things around (though some things have been), as I included specific information from the source that were relevant in each section, and, as history, is better presented chronologically IMO as it is in the source; it wasn't a haphazard copypaste. Much of the material in the source was already quite straightforward.

But anyway, would it help to send you the edit this time, before I make it? I'd rather not risk another reversion if I can rather ascertain which phrases in particular are problematic (the bulk of added content is in just a few sections: one paragraph in "Background," the new "Slogan Agitation," and a direct quote in the "1953" section). Sapedder (talk) 06:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

The problem is that you are presenting the same ideas in the same order using the same sentence structure, while only substituting a few of the words. You can't just "reword phrases"; the content has to be completely re-written using your own words. Chronological material does not have to be presented in a different order, but it can be difficult to re-work, as can direct clean prose. But if you can't figure out a way to re-write the material, you can't add it to Wikipedia. Here are some examples in Punjabi Suba movement. The source says:

The main driving force of the Punjabi suba movement was that the Sikh leadership saw a separate political status for the Sikhs as essential to preserve an independent Sikh entity.

and your version says:

The primary impetus of the movement was that the Sikh leadership deemed the securing of a distinct political status and unity for the Sikhs, as a national minority, as being crucial for safeguarding an independent Sikh body politic.

So you can see you presented the same ideas in the same order using the same sentence structure, while only substituting a few of the words. Then you include the same quotation from Tara Singh. Then the next sentence from the source:

The Akali Dal presented itself as providing this critical organization, the Khalsa panth, which elicited allegiance from its Sikh constituency.

and your addition is strikingly similar in construction and sequence, with only a few of the words changed:

The Akali Dal presented itself as providing this essential political organization, the Khalsa panth, eliciting strong support from its Sikh base.

What you need to try to do is distill it down to what the primary topic of the paragraph is and work from there. The whole gist of this section is that the author of the thesis posits that the leadership of the party believed that the survival of the Sikh faith in the region required the formation of a political entity as well as a territorial entity. Hence they believed that in order to ensure Sikh independence in the region, the religious, political, and territorial issues all had to be tackled contemporaneously, and the Akali Dal presented itself as the political party that could achieve these goals.

The next section of the source says:

On the question of participation in politics, the Akali Dal claimed that the Sikh community acting as a single political group was imperative for the existence of Sikh religion. It was argued that participation in politics by the Sikhs acting as a community was built into Sikh religious ideology, for Guru Gobind Singh established the Khalsa panth in order to organize his religious followers into a political community. Apart from this he hardly made any other changes in the doctrines formulated by the first Sikh master, Guru Nanak. Thus, the Akali leadership drew on an interpretation of Sikh history and traditions in order to enhance and legitimise their authority in the struggle for critical political leverage. The Akali leaders believed that it was essential to provide the Sikhs with political leverage in order to preserve an independent Sikh entity. This could be possible if the Sikhs had a territorial unit in which they were the dominant population. By this logic the Akali Dal came to identify itself with the Sikh panth

And your version again is quite similar but it is different enough that it could be accepted. So please use this as an example of what we are looking for:

On the matter of political participation, the Akali Dal considered the continued existence of the Sikh religion as predicated on the community acting as a consolidated political unit, which could only be possible if it had a territorial unit. It posited that Sikh political participation was an integral part of Sikh theology, as the Khalsa]] had been established to organize religious Sikhs into a political community, one of Guru Gobind Singh's signature contributions to Sikhism, and that the panth was coincident with the Sikh polity itself.

— Diannaa (talk) 14:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, thanks for the pointers. The rest of the edit was fairly easy to rewrite (if I've done it adequately), but it was just this bit that was a little tricky to rewrite while staying true to the source imo. Providing that the "On the matter of political participation..." part is OK as you said (though I've modified that further as well), would the following be suitable to replace the "primary impetus" bit:

The movement was primarily conceived to secure a distinct Sikh political status as a safeguard for what was to be a small minority after independence; as Tara Singh wrote in 1945... (his quote here)."

and to replace "presented itself" and moved to follow the "matter of political participation" bit:

"... the party received strong support from its base by offering this political organization rooted in religious tradition."

Sapedder (talk) 08:41, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I think you now have to tools to assess yourself what is acceptable or not.— Diannaa (talk) 13:29, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Soshin Chikazumi

Hi, Diannaa! You rightly deleted the article due to non-compliance with the rules. However, is it possible to rectify the situation if I'll use some facts of Chikazumi’s biography from the indicated source (protected by copyright), stated in my own words, to save the Physicist-stub about the scientist? Topp (talk) 17:38, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

That's exactly how Wikipedia articles are written.— Diannaa (talk) 20:30, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Adding Story & Reception

Can you please add the story & reception for the page Where Willy Went, it will be nice if you do so! Randomtransmans (talk) 23:14, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Your erroneous claim of a copyright violation

The text you deleted from Texas cichlid as a “copyright violation” of an aquabid.com posting from 2018 was NOT an instance of me copying from Aquabid, actually, Aquabid copied that text from an older version of Wikipedia. If you will look at this version of the Wikipedia page from March 10, 2009, that predates the Aquabid.com posting by NINE YEARS, you will see that the Aquabid.com website copied this text from Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Texas_cichlid&diff=966818306&oldid=276314010 Some time between when Aquabid copied this text and now, the text was removed from the page, though it was good information that was properly sourced. I really wish you’d be more careful when removing something as a copyright violation and then warning the editor, because this is the SECOND TIME you have mistakenly claimed something I wrote was a copyright violation this year (first was on the Aline Griffith, Countess of Romanones page). Whatever bot or tool you are using to find potential copyright violations is obviously flawed and you should be wary of using it without double-checking from now on. 74.213.48.38 (talk) 16:03, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the mistake. However, since there's anywhere from 75 to 125 copyvio reports per day, and I usually do a high percentage of them, it won't be possible time-wise for me to check all the old revisions for each article on each report that I assess. One way you can help prevent this type of error on my part in the future is to leave an informative edit summary when restoring material from an old revision. Thanks.— Diannaa (talk) 19:40, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Claim of a copyright violation

We made some recent edits to Bernardo_Fort_Brescia page that you reverted. We are not only the originators of the added content, we have sole permission to include the text in the biography. The information is not FALSE. All information that was added to the page is true to his history and we wish it to be revived. There are other past references to the Arquitectonica website on the page as well. (ARQwiki)(talk) 18:59, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

If you are the copyright holder and wish to release this material under a compatible license, please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. Regardless of the copyright issue, the material would likely not be accepted for publication due to its being worded like an advertisement.

Why are you speaking as though more than one person has access to your Wikipedia account? That's not allowed.— Diannaa (talk) 19:52, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Nazi Party member number

Hello. I’m just wondering if you have a source that says it should contain a comma, because I think thousand separator in Europe generally uses a dot . and not a comma , like the anglosphere. Northern Moonlight 22:12, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

I found some photos of Nazi Party membership cards and they did not have any separator at all. So I have removed the comma.— Diannaa (talk) 19:22, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Agriculture in Sri Lanka

Hi! I just want a small help, How to find trustworthy sources in internet or online published newspaper. "Specially Science." (I'm new editor) Avocado J (talk) 13:25, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

T-Mobile US copyvio

Hi Diannaa, as the person who reverted the addition, I probably should have followed up on that. I had a lot of edits on my watchlist at the time, and neglected to do it right then, and forgot about it later. (I've coined the term "forgetstinating" to describe this, as I do it a lot more than just this incident.) Anyway, thanks for catching this, and I'll try to do a better job of following up in future such incidents. - BilCat (talk) 22:06, 15 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks BilCat.— Diannaa (talk) 11:26, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Why removed sourced content from Ajanta Caves (Ajanta Caves) : please look into it.

Hello Diannaa (talk · contribs),

I see that both the content and links added to the page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ajanta_Caves have been reversed.

As you might notice that the content from https://citykatta.com/ck-how-ajanta-caves-were-rediscovered was neither copied NOR used from the source.

Rather the content from the links:
1) https://www.outlookindia.com/outlooktraveller/travelnews/story/53455/the_curse_of_ajanta AND 2) https://www.newindianexpress.com/cities/hyderabad/2018/jul/03/ajanta-cave-paintings-of-nizam-era-lie-in-a-state-of-neglect-1837405.html was removed without any notification along with the links.

I feel : If there was an issue with the citation, a tag could have been added instead, rather than removing the whole part.

Request you to re-instate the edit made and add a "citation needed" tag, so that any corrections required can be made.

I feel very discouraged to see any edit made being "removed" this way, as doing research and adding content itself takes quite some time and efforts.

Awaiting reply.

Kind Regards, Abbasquadir (talk) 13:35, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

I did notice that the citations you added were not a match for the place where I found the overlapping content, but that's not the point. The point is that the same prose has been previously published elsewhere online, which means you can't add the same prose to Wikipedia, because to do so is a violation of our copyright policy.— Diannaa (talk) 13:38, 16 July 2020

Please understand that the content was NOT copied at all. You also removed the option to undo it, could have atleast warned/informed me, please understand that it took considerable amount of time for me to type the content!

Fixed acidential transclusion of userpages. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:55, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

@Emir of Wikipedia: @Omer123hussain: Thoufiq313 (talk · contribs) looping you in, can you please help?

Abbasquadir (talk) 13:51, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

The content you added is a match for prose that was published at https://citykatta.com/ck-how-ajanta-caves-were-rediscovered/ in November 2019. Please see this report to view the overlapping text.— Diannaa (talk) 14:02, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

This can easily be fixed, also please remove the transclusion for https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mir_Osman_Ali_Khan& as well. - Abbasquadir (talk) 16:55, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

@Emir of Wikipedia: can you please remove the transclusion for https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mir_Osman_Ali_Khan ? your help will be greatly appreciated. Sincere Thanks Abbasquadir (talk) 18:06, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Abbasquadir, I am not clear as to what you are asking. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:08, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

There was a change made by Diannaa @ 12:36, 16 July 2020‎ whose (cur | prev) are UNCLICKABLE Links ie. the timestamps are stricked off, with no option to undo her changes made. iI fear it was not just copyright content that was removed.

Please check : https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mir_Osman_Ali_Khan&action=history Abbasquadir (talk) 18:15, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Abbasquadir, not sure what that has to do with a transclusion , but we can't have copyrighted content in an edit. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 18:27, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Not sure how I ended up getting pinged but anyway. @Abbasquadir:, the "unclickable" links are not a result of transclusion. It's a result of revision deletion. The whole edit has been scrubbed from the history per WP:CRD. Copyrighted material can never be retained on WP, even in the page history. Diannaa is a very experienced editor when it comes to copyrighted material and is my goto admin for copyright related issues.

Abbasquadir appreciate your interest in editing WP and good that you prefer discussion to avoid edit-warring. Please know that WP have zero tolerance towards copyright materials, and there can be legal complications if contain/publish copyright material. This article Mir Osman Ali Khan is currently in a solecistic condition with no relevance to his personality, any way if you are interested we can discuss this on related talkpage. Regards :)–--Omer123hussain (talk) 07:22, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Removal of the selection procedure for President's Colour Award

Hey Dianaa, I wrote this time in my own words and I didn't copy from Jagran Josh. Please reconsider it. It is a procedure, how can it be very different in writing? Mangalam Agrawal (talk) 02:58, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Source document:

This honour is awarded to the police for service, valor, bravery, and martyrdom. Those armed forces, paramilitary or state police force completes 25 years, can apply for this honour. This award is given by the President. After that, the Ministry of Home Affairs constituted the committee of CRPF, BSF, CBI, RAW, Intelligence Bureau (IB), Odisha Police and Director General of Police of Himachal Pradesh.

This committee evaluated the work, resources, weapons, department, efficiency, technique, and strength of Gujarat Police. Then its report was sent to the Prime Minister of India and President of India. After getting the approval from the President, on March 6, 2019, the Gujarat Police received official information that the President has approved the Gujarat Police to give the President's colours.

Your addition:

The honour of the President's Colour is awarded to the police for service, valor, bravery, and martyrdom. Those armed forces, paramilitary forces or state police forces completes 25 years, can apply for this honour. This award is given by the President or by the designated officer, on behalf of the President.

At first, the Ministry of Home Affairs constitutes the committee of the CAPF, Investigation Agency, Intelligence Agencies and the State Police Force to evaluate the work, resources, weapons, department, efficiency, technique, and strength of the military unit (in question). Then, its report would be sent to the Prime Minister of India and the President of India. After getting the approval from the President, the official information (that the President has approved the military unit (in question) to give the President's Colours) would be received by military unit (in question). Then, in the ceremony, the President would award the President's Colour to the military unit (in question).

So, you've presented the same information in the same order using almost identical wording. You can't do that. It's a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy

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 (this is not always possible with chronological material or procedures). Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Paraphrase: Write It in Your Own Words. Check out the links in the menu on the left for some exercises to try. Or study this module aimed at WikiEd students.— Diannaa (talk) 13:23, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

So, I didn't just copy and paste the content. I just took some points from that because it is a Procedure and Procedures can't be different in writing. I have also changed many words and wrote in my own words. Please review it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mangalam Agrawal (talk • contribs) 07:43, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

I just did review it, and the results are above. It is a violation of our copyright policy, and we can't publish it.— Diannaa (talk) 12:40, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Old Book

Hi Diannaa, How old does a book need to be before it is in the public domain. I vaguely remember 1923, but I understand the year has moved forward. So would it be 1924? Thanks.scope_creep^Talk 17:00, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, it moves forward each year in January. You can check this and many other copyrighty things at Commons:Hirtle chart.— Diannaa (talk) 22:59, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, FYI, our article on Copyright did say

In the United States, all books and other works published before 1923 have expired copyrights and are in the public domain

until I just updated it to 1925.

However, in the hirtle chart, under:

Sound Recordings Published in the United States

The date of publication field is "Before 1923"

In the copyright article the term "works" includes sound recordings.

I think this means we need a further edit to clarify that the date of "before 1925" applies to works such as books, magazines, newspapers, pamphlets etc. but not sound recordings.

The current definition of works is:

Specifics vary by jurisdiction, but these can include poems, theses, fictional characters, plays and other literary works, motion pictures, choreography, musical compositions, sound recordings, paintings, drawings, sculptures, photographs, computer software, radio and television broadcasts, and industrial designs.

Can we infer that the "before 1925" date for public domain applies to all of these categories except for sound recordings, which are handled differently? S Philbrick(Talk) 23:08, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

I have checked on the original Hirtle chart which is at https://copyright.cornell.edu/publicdomain and it shows 1923 for sound recordings. The underlying composition has a different copyright term. Please see footnote 15 of the document, which was updated on January 3, 2020. Good eye Sphilbrick.— Diannaa (talk) 12:39, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, Thanks, I updated Copyright S Philbrick(Talk) 13:49, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

List of Pakistani Peace Laureates

Miss Diannaa, I noticed your editing in the page of List of Pakistani Peace Laureates being an admin. So, I decided to discuss a serious issue with you. An admin, named: BarrelProof was initially removing the detail of award Kentucky Colonel from that page with a claim that the award is a minor one. I recorded my protest that the page does not describes major or minor awards. It is only about international awards achieved by Pakistani people, so this award should be mention in this page. He started writing lame excuses and then he removed details of many other awards in jealousy. I am wondering how can an admin/ editor/ moderator remove a data which is previously approved by the existing editors. He even removed the details of those awards which were marked OK by you. I saw your templates in that page too. Can you please interfere and look into the matter. An editor can not remove the awards like this. Zeruiah Michael (talk) 20:13, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, if you take an interest in this issue, I would welcome your review of my User talk page, my recent edit history, and Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nawab Afridi. —BarrelProof (talk) 20:18, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

BarrelProof, you have claimed the things fake, false and poorly sourced which were previously cleared by Diannaa. You can check the previous history. She moderated the page very fairly, perfectly and excellently. And she never removed any detail about any award. Though she made edits in past in the descriptive text about the details of awards and their winners but she never never unlisted any person from the article. Instead of making fair edits, you started removing people from the list which were mentioned in the very beginning of that page. You even have no answer to my questions which I asked on your Talk Page. You had a problem with the award Kentucky Colonel (as according to you it was not a big award) and you only tried to make revenge because we tried to add it again because there was no problem in adding it. Zeruiah Michael (talk) 20:24, 18 July 2020 (UTC)

Principal

Respected Madam Diannaa, Please take a look in the page of Medical College Kolkata. User GreaterPonce665 is editing this page disruptively. He is not familiar with our college history.This is a heritage institution established by British in 1835, the first medical college in Asia with numerous significant people as Principals such as David Here and many others. He is attempting to remove the legacy of those people in medical education in our college. Madam few weeks ago you made the principals column by yourself as I posted the required information about the history of our college. User GreaterPonce665 is not following wikipedia guidelines and using abusive words and insulting me and our college history. He stated "none of the principals are significant. whereas they are integral part of our college. Hope you will understand the significance of principals column. Please look into this matter as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Civilguy1997 (talk • contribs) 05:04, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

This is a content dispute, and you need to discuss it with the other editor on the talk page of the article. If you can't solve the dispute that way, you can consider trying one of the venues for dispute resolution at WP:dispute resolution— Diannaa (talk) 12:44, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Robert E. Lee High School (Tyler, Texas)

Hi, you removed multiple sections that were not cited in the article, why did you do that? I am getting the documentation for explicit permission, I was told when contacting them on the phone that there was no issue with using the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpacemanMD (talk • contribs) 07:01, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

I have double checked, and I only removed text that was copied from https://thetylerloop.com/robert-e-lee-high-school-race-and-segregation-in-tyler-a-130-year-timeline/. If and when the copyright holders release their work under a compatible license the content may be restored. Please see WP:donating copyrighted materials for details. — Diannaa (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

About copyright rules

Hi, sorry about copyright problem. I am still new to Wikipedia (no matter how old is my account, or how many edits I have). So, I have question. Can I use the same source, insert the same point/conclusion from that source, but using my own words? EchoBlu (talk) 15:03, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes you can.In fact that's how Wikipedia articles are written :) — Diannaa (talk) 15:08, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Hi, I hope it's better now. Article I am still learning and trying to understand when the amount of used content starts to be legal. If there is still a small violation, please don't delete everything. Instead, tell me how to improve it (or how to avoid it next time, without removing information). Thanks. EchoBlu (talk) 22:14, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

The amount of copying that is tolerated is zero. 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.

Please have a look at this report, where you can see that the second version still has a lot of overlap, including unique phrases that need to be re-written. Compare my re-write: here— Diannaa (talk) 13:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

@Diannaa: Thanks, I compared your work with mine, and now I understand much better. I made few small changes to make a few points (I used that source because of the good points), but using my own words. A "powerful unit" has become a phrase that is used everywhere when describing MOBA's gameplay, it's not something copied from the source. Thanks for learning me new things. EchoBlu (talk) 16:36, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Revdel request

Hello, Diannaa. This edit is copy-pasted from the cited source. - NitinMlk (talk) 16:58, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks for reporting— Diannaa (talk) 17:04, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Robert e Lee High school

Hi, I now have explicit permission to use the article for Wikipedia. can you remove the edits you did please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by SpacemanMD (talk • contribs) 17:22, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

I will undo the revision deletion if and when a permission email has been received and cleared by our OTRS team.— Diannaa (talk) 17:27, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

SpacemanMD, As a member of the OTRS team, I'm not current active in the permissions queue, but if you arrange for one to be sent, and it isn't actioned in 24 hours, give me a ping and I'll look for it. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:22, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Philbrick, Hi I am very new to the back side of this site, but i have forwarded the email to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. Is that the correct address to send it? thanks, SpacemanMD (talk) 02:14, 21 July 2020 (UTC) spaceman

That's for images. The correct email address for text is permissions-en@wikimedia.org. You got Sphilbrick's user name wrong, and he will not have received your ping.— Diannaa (talk) 12:22, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

SpacemanMDI see the request. I moved it into the proper queue. Unfortunately, it has several errors.

• The text of the permission statement must be written in a very specific way. The required text is outlined in the box at Wikipedia:Declaration_of_consent_for_all_enquiries
• Although your goal may be to make it available for Wikipedia, any permission statement that states that the material is released for the use of Wikipedia is not acceptable. It must be available to anyone for any purpose (which is why the specific wording must be used).
• The email must come directly from the copyright holder (and they must declare that they are the copyright holder). I have often arranged for permissions, and it would be much easier if they sent them to me and I forwarded them to OTRS, that is unfortunately not permitted.--S Philbrick(Talk) 12:36, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Philbrick, so I just need them to go to the link and fill it out? Im sorry im just trying to confirm exactly what i need to do as it isnt very clear. SpacemanMD (talk) 22:18, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

SpacemanMD, I'm not "Philbrick" I'm "Sphilbrick". The copyright holder should fill it in and send it in. I often help them by filling it out for them, but they must send the email to OTRS (permissions-en@wikimedia.org).--S Philbrick(Talk) 00:12, 22 July 2020 (UTC)

2020-07-20 Response request regarding w:Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution

Hi. You left a message on my talk page regarding a copyright violation on the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution article. I responded to your message with some questions. Can you please answer them at my talk page?
I didn't found your talk page initialy so I created a talk page here at User talk:Diannaa/Copyright. I moved the content to your original "User talk: Diannaa" page after I discovered your original talk page. Can you please therefore delete the "User talk:Diannaa/Copyright" talk page. Thanks in advance. --P3Y229 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 13:30, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

I responded to your reply and left a question for You. Can you please answer my question at my talk page? Thanks in advance. --P3Y229 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Talk:Grass court

Unusual situation here. A dynamic IP user has multiple times over the last few months copied-and-pasted the full text (or at least a substantial portion) of multiple articles about Roger Federer to the Talk:Grass court page, only to immediately revert with a "wrong place removed" edit summary. The problem is there's no right place to do that here; and the edit history now contains unambiguous copyvios. I'm asking if you could revdel the back to the April 17, 2010, revision.

As for how to address the underlying behavior, I have no idea. It's clearly the same person, as behavior is identical, but these weird edits are so far apart, and none of the IP addresses are the same, so I have no idea how to prevent this from happening again. oknazevad (talk) 17:13, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Page protection won't work, because the edits are not frequent enough to warrant protection. Blocks will not work, because a short block will not be noticed if he only returns every 6 months or so. I will watch-list the page. Please report events at WP:AIV if I don't act within 12-24 hours.— Diannaa (talk) 21:02, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Attribution alert

Thanks...that guideline slipped my mind when splitting. (Regarding the split of Cain and Abel from Cain and Abel) Jhenderson ⁷⁷⁷ 22:01, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

You've got mail

Hello, Diannaa. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Ntx61 (talk) 06:25, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Re:Copying licensed material requires attribution

Hi, Diana. Didn't know about Wikias license. Thank you for this precious information. :)--User:TeenAngels1234 (talk) 12:48, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Mazury Polish Song and Dance Folk Group

Hi Dianaa, Can you let me know where or what part of the article flared up as being copyrighted? There were no images added if there were any images they would be personal images, also everything that was written was independent and not copied from anywhere. So just a bit confused there, any guidance would be great. Minorgre (talk) 13:44, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

The draft contained material copied from https://www.mazury.org.uk/ and https://www.mazury.org.uk/about. Since the material was previously published elsewhere online, it enjoys copyright protection, and we can't host it here unless the copyright holder gives permission and releases the material under license. 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) 13:54, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

question can you please look at the post on my talk page

[5] an editor indicates that I had a copyvio (its the last post on my talk page, however I used the linked tool for all my edits to find it?, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 15:17, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 21:37, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Edits to Mike Dempsey - Intelligence

Dianna - in reference to the page for Mike Dempsey (intelligence), I was updating biographical information on Mr. Dempsey's behalf. Clearly we don't want to violate any copyright issues. It appears the language deleted was from a bio he has publicly used in several places, including websites for ODNI and Columbia. Is it permissible to then use this language with an appropriate citation? ---- — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zhhooper73 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

No it is not okay to add it to Wikipedia. Since the material was previously published elsewhere online, it enjoys copyright protection, and we can't host it here unless the copyright holder gives permission and releases the material under license. This is true no matter how many places the material has been published. 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.

Another point: If you are editing Wikipedia on behalf of the subject of the article, you have a conflict of interest. If you are being paid to edit, our terms of use require that you say so on your user page. I have added some information on these topics to your user talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 21:46, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the additional guidance. I'm more than happy to 1) redraft language and 2) provide any necessary disclosures.----

Sagaing Fault article

Hi Diannaa, I just noticed that the article Sagaing Fault has contained a copyright violation since its very first edit over nine years ago. I've rewritten the relevant sentences, but I would be grateful if you could do the appropriate revdels, thanks. Mikenorton (talk) 13:57, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Where was it copied from?— Diannaa (talk) 15:06, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have mentioned that - citation#3, from the abstract [6]. Mikenorton (talk) 18:42, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

 Done— Diannaa (talk) 18:49, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Mikenorton (talk) 07:03, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Pacific Elementary School District article content removal

Hi Diannaa, a couple of hours ago you deleted the content that I just posted to fill out the stub article on the Pacific Elementary School District. The content was written by me. I originally wrote it for the Pacific Elementary School website (I am president of the School District Board of Trustees). I can assure you that the District asserts no copywrite control over this text as it is my language. Can we undo the deletion?Grhabyt (talk) 22:25, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa (talk) 23:34, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi,

Just wanted to say many thanks for detailed information regarding my contribution and useful links! Very kind of you!

All the best. Wikintastic (talk) 20:45, 26 July 2020 (UTC)

Removal of content from Burke and Wills page for alleged 'copyright breach'??

Reference this message... Hello Andrew M McC, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Burke and Wills expedition have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain I used newspaper resources from 1863, unequivocally our of copyright. Could you elaborate on exactly what you removed and why? Andrew M McC

• Copyright or not, User:Andrew_M_McC, copying and pasting is a terrible way of article writing, regardless of copyright status. Drmies (talk) 04:04, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much Drmies, very, very helpful advice, I'll check with you before I contribute again, Cheers Andrew

Sorry for the mistake. In the future, please add attribution when copying from public domain sources: simply add the template {{PD-notice}} after your citation. Please do this in the future so that patrollers and our readers will be aware that you copied the prose rather than wrote it yourself, and that it's okay to copy verbatim. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 12:05, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Adding: Raj era texts are not considered a reliable source for castes in India.— Diannaa (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

While we are trespassing on your kindness already

Thank you for your help and advice on the ICD lists.

Would you please put Pain theories on your list of pages to review as well? It has been tagged as a suspected copyvio since 2011, and it's the only unresolved possible copyvio left in WPMED-tagged articles. Thanks for considering it. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:50, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

WhatamIdoing, I'm also looking at it, comparing it to sources from it's creation... it isn't infringing upon sources 2, 4, 5, and 6, from this revision Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk🌴Help out at CCI!} 23:13, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

The tag was actually added on August 30, 2012‎. Still, it's difficult to prove things one way or another at this late date. I will have a look tomorrow.— Diannaa (talk) 23:17, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, both of you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:03, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I have found a lot of overlap with this thesis. Copying a thesis explains the essay-like tone. Much of the rest was moved from Pain on January 3, 2012. Not sure how to proceed with cleanup. @Moneytrees: do you think we should list at WP:CP, or just do it now?— Diannaa (talk) 12:37, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I'm not sure if that's a violation, since it cites studies from 2014 and the violation would have been inserted in late 2011. Maybe there was a later edit. Either way, I agree that the wording is strange. Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk🌴Help out at CCI!} 16:30, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Good eye - you are correct, the person who wrote the thesis likely copied from Wikipedia :/. — Diannaa (talk) 18:43, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

I have removed the maintenance tag, as I couldn't find any copying. — Diannaa (talk) 19:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Varun Rai

Hi Diannaa, I just noticed that the draft page I was creating with the title Draft:Varun Rai was deleted with the following message: (G12: Unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www8.nationalacademies.org/pa/projectview.aspx?key=DEPS-BEES-19-01 (TW)). No content was taken from the linked source. Since I'm new to this, I would appreciate it if you could point me to why this was tagged as an infringement. I will be able to make corrections accordingly. Thank you! LsBvJs (talk) 00:09, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found.— Diannaa (talk) 00:16, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Ah I understand. I will rewrite the article. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LsBvJs (talk • contribs) 00:22, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Template:1500smusic

Hi Diananaa, I was wondering if you could offer some insight into this. This template: Template:1500smusic has been recently been completed changed in scope and content from how it was originally (here) without any prior discussion. I was going to revert but it seems that an editor has gone to a lot of trouble in doing so and I have in the past found this individual in particular to not be especially collaborative. Should I simply revert without contacting them since this was such an extreme alteration? - Aza24 (talk) 01:38, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

No you should not. Just follow the same process as you would with any other edit you disagree with. Per WP:BRD, if you revert the edit, you must open a discussion on the article (or template) talk page.— Diannaa (talk) 11:51, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Elizabeth Musks and IP

Elizabeth Musks has been making edits which have been reverted by an IP. Not sure if copyright violations or how the IP found out about this. --Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 15:13, 28 July 2020 (UTC) (please  mention me on reply; thanks!)

@Emir of Wikipedia: The IP is a longtime editor who knows what he's doing. I will do some revision deletion on the ones he marked as copyvio. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 18:47, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 19:11, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Revel request

This edit is copy-pasted from the cited source. - NitinMlk (talk) 19:55, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

done. Thank you for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 20:01, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

Harold W. Roberts

Hello Diannaa! While browsing CopyPatrol an edit on Harold W. Roberts That edit was clearly a copyvio and I was about to revert it when I noticed the page history. Lefthand777 has made loads of copyvios (Earwig report) here and I was shocked by the scale. I thought I might get your advice as you seem to have rvd an edit by that user there. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 12:39, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Please have a look at the talkpage, where you will find there is an OTRS ticket. This means that the content at https://camprobertshistoricalmuseum.com/corporal-roberts has been released under a compatible license.— Diannaa (talk) 12:51, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

In addition to that, I found a lot of stuff copied from Find-A-Grave, which I have now removed. Thank you,— Diannaa (talk) 13:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up! I appreciate it. — Yours, Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 14:57, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Revdel

Hello! Could you please revdel all the versions of Heating and Cooling Plant (University of Regina), before the most current? I cleaned it up based on this Earwig report.

done. Thanks,— Diannaa (talk) 18:47, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

thank you kindly. I found some more copyvio by that user, and MER_C has also opened a CCI. Not knowing the first thing about the CCI process, is there a simple way to point to additional articles with copyvio for the investigation? Or will the list of their articles automatically included in the CCI with earwig stats? ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:57, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

We have a script that will generate a list of articles that will need to be checked.— Diannaa (talk) 19:01, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks!ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Also done : Ernest J. Smith— Diannaa (talk) 19:30, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Los Angeles-class submarine

Hello, Diannaa. You should please slow down and not make assumptions as regard fas.org copyright claims -- there are none on the page in question. Please restore the text to the Los Angeles-class submarine page that you've deleted. --104.15.130.191 (talk) 22:46, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, but 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. — Diannaa (talk) 22:50, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Fine. I'll restore the language before my edits. What a place. --104.15.130.191 (talk) 00:05, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Lieff Cabraser Heimann & Bernstein

Hi Diannaa,

Our page was recently flagged with a copyright violation. How do we resolve this if the information being used is from us? Also, due to the COI policy, how can we make edits to our page without them being taken down? If we provide information or edits to you, are you able to approve them? Editing these pages is somewhat new for us so we apologize for any policy violations. Thanks for your help!L27594111 (talk) 23:13, 30 July 2020 (UTC)Dustin

Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page.

Another point: The wording of your post implies that your account is shared by multiple people. Shared accounts are not permitted. Each user needs to create their own account please.— Diannaa (talk) 23:58, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Image — Stephen Fuchs (anthropologist)

Hello, Diannaa. I request you to kindly have a look at File:Stephen Fuchs (anthropologist).png and its talk page. Please tell me if I have got things right or is there anything that needs to be changed/updated? I did pay attention and tried to do everything right, but still, at this moment, I am not exactly 100% sure that I have made it through here)) I would be really grateful if you could, please, have a look. Please feel free to ask questions, if need be. Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 06:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

This is nicely done.— Diannaa (talk) 11:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for accepting the request. Thanks)) Мастер Шторм (talk) 15:44, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Image — Indera Paul Singh (anthropologist)

Also, I would be thankful if you could have a look at the source of this image – File:Indera Paul Singh (anthropologist).png – and, let me know that if it I was a good idea to crop the picture (also, kept the quality lower than original). Actually, before these two picture, I had uploaded only one picture (please see — User talk:Diannaa/Archive 70#Query regarding upload of a file). I think that I have got it right, but still, I want to run it by an expert on the subject for advice/comments (that would serve as a basis/guidance for future uploads). Thanks, Мастер Шторм (talk) 07:09, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

The way you cropped it is good. Everything is correct with the templates and layout as well. Cheers,— Diannaa (talk) 11:22, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the having a look, and also for the confirmation. Thanks)) Мастер Шторм (talk) 15:45, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Copypatrol down - Turnitin is performing routine maintenance

Copypatrol will be down for several hours as Turnitin is performing routine maintenance. See https://twitter.com/turnitinstatus and https://turnitin.statuspage.io/. No new reports will be added till they're done, and the iThenticate links won't work. We can continue to assess the reports that are already on the board. — Diannaa (talk) 15:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, Heh, I just came to see if someone needed prompting, but I guess not. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:27, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

They've just finished the maintenance, so I've posted at Eran's talk page to see if the bot needs to be re-started to get things happening again. Off to the gym now; I can open a ticket if nobody has re-started the bot by the time I get back. Cheers— Diannaa (talk) 19:30, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on Artificial Intelligence Institute

There is also copyright violations as per tool in ASIC v Kobelt, please manage it🌸🌺宮本🌺🌸 (talk) 15:44, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

I will. Thank you for the report.— Diannaa (talk) 15:53, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, if possible please see Ibrahim Amin Baldar for the same purpose 🌸🌺宮本🌺🌸 (talk) 16:32, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

 Done— Diannaa (talk) 16:40, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, if you had read the talk page of ASIC v Kobelt, you would see my attempted explanation to 🌸🌺宮本🌺🌸 that there was no copyright violation issue. The parts of the ASIC v Kobelt article that were similar to the OpinionsOnHigh article (which was linked), simply recount the facts of the court case. Those facts mentioned in the article are lifted directly from the judgement. There is no copyright issue and your reversion has just resulted in article containing a number of factual innaccuracies (Which I had fixed, in the edits that you have unfortunately rolled back). Please read the article talk page before you peform a rollback. Jack4576 (talk) 16:18, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

in addition, (fyi) 🌸🌺宮本🌺🌸 is a banned sockpuppet Jack4576 (talk) 16:20, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Jack4576. The actual court case which is here. The blog post that was a match for the content I removed is here. Unique phrases that I removed that are a match or very close match to the blog post and not present in the actual court document include: "Mr Kobelt had no way of knowing what the balance of the customer’s account was"; "Customers who were subject to the system would be unable to buy groceries, as the balance of their accounts was immediately removed when it came into the account. Kobelt would allow customers to use a portion of what he had withdrawn at any given time to purchase groceries".

There's another issue: Government works in Australia, including official documents, legislation, and prescribed works such as court judgements, enjoy copyright protection for 50 years from publication. So no, I will not be restoring the content. It's okay to use short properly attributed quotations from the actual court document. See Crown copyright#Australia; https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2017C00180 — Diannaa (talk) 19:03, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

P.S. I did not revert or use rollback to perform the removal. I only removed/reworded the overlapping content. This should mean that I did not reintroduce any errors that you had fixed. — Diannaa (talk) 19:09, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Those closely matched phrases, which are tiny; aren't mentioned within the actual court documents, but they reflect exact facts which ARE contained within the actual court documents. There is no way for me to accurately write what happened in the judgement without closely matching those phrases. The recounting of facts, using altered but closely matched text is not a breach of Australian copyright law. 1. Australian copyright law in 'literary works' only is breached when a phrase matches exactly. 2. Australian copyright law does not extend to the grabbing of the trivial, short sentences that you have there. But whatever. Thanks for trying. Jack4576 (talk) 02:54, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

For example your addition of 'Kobelt would offer them credit of up to 50% of the amount he had withdrawn' in an effort to rewrite the section in a way that doesn't breach copyright; is factually incorrect. Jack4576 (talk) 02:59, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

You also deleted the name of the town in South Australia in which the facts of this case took place. Why? Are town names under copyright now? Jack4576 (talk) 03:01, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

There's almost always a way to contribute without violating Wikipedia's copyright policy. In fact I re-wrote most of the content rather than removed it, and you have re-written some yourself since my last visit to the article. 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.

If you have a look at paragraph 23 you will see that "Kobelt would offer them credit of up to 50% of the amount he had withdrawn" is in my opinion a pretty good summary of the source, which says " Mr Kobelt applied at least 50 per cent of the funds withdrawn from his customers' accounts to reduce their indebtedness to Nobbys. Mr Kobelt said that the remaining 50 per cent of his customers' funds was available for the customer's use." So this means Kobelt would take their entire paycheque, deposit it into the store's bank account, and then allow them to use approximately half of the funds for purchases at the store. Without knowing the size of each shopper's debt, it's hard to say whetner "credit" is the right word. If a customer has $1000 in debt and Kobelt confiscates a $500 paycheque, it is indeed credit if he allows them to buy $250 of groceries. But if a customer owes less than the amount of the paycheque, "credit" might no longer be the correct word.

Of course the name of the town is not copyright. I see you have already re-added it.— Diannaa (talk) 13:22, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey there

Artificial Intelligence Institute

Not sure if this is the right button to add to the talk page. Regardless thank you for informing me of some of Wikipedia’s rules. I figured since my team and I wrote most of the stuff on the artificial intelligence institute website (buffalo.edu/AI) that it would be “ok” to copy and paste for the time being until we were able to change it as needed.

I see you mentioned something about being able to request copy right permissions or something - I never knew that was a thing but that would make a lot of sense. What’s a good way to get started on that?

Thank you for not yet deleting the page. I am definitely looking to improve it after these suggestions. I probably should have kept it in draft form but oh well. Once I make the necessary adjustments, how do I remove the banners on the top of the page where it stays “up for deletion/significant problems on this page?” Once again thanks for not deleting the page. Will get this sorted out ASAP! Just wanted to comment here to show you I’m a real person who really likes Wikipedia and not some bot just making pages to promote work they are connected to or something. Not sure if that’s a thing but I wouldn’t doubt it.

Peaceful regards, Austinwb99 (talk) 17:38, 2 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello Austinwb99. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see Wikipedia:donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.

The article has been nominated for deletion. The deletion discussion is located at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Artificial Intelligence Institute. Deletion discussions are typically left open for a minimum of a week. The nomination banner must be left in place until a decision is reached.— Diannaa (talk) 19:15, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Regarding the changes in Andhra Pradesh capital region page

The changes which have been done by some members to this page are legitimate and not with a thought to vandalise, the changes have been brought up only after the Andhra Pradesh government passed a law and it came into force. I request you to revert the earlier revision made by various members. Now Andhra Pradesh has 3 capitals: Visakhapatnam- the executive capital, Amaravati-the legislative capital and Kurnool- the judicial capital. Vizagite01 (talk) 13:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

I do understand that the state now has three capitals and the page needs updating, but that does not make it okay to add copyright material to Wikipedia. So the answer is No, I cannot re-add the content I removed.— Diannaa (talk) 14:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)

Cuba

Hi, Diannaa,

Can you have a look at Cuba, please? Earwig reports 67.1% for an url previously discovered by Asukite, and there does seem to be a few paragraphs of direct copying. Since 25 June, the article has been monopolized by a new editor, Gatedais (talk · contribs)^{[no ping]} who, while seemingly knowledgeable and capable, leaves no edit summaries, and brooks no opposition; simply reverting anybody that gets in his way. At least maybe the COPYVIO can be stopped, I hope. It didn't work when Asukite tried to remove the copyvio, though; he was reverted within three minutes. Additional material seeems to come from one of two sources; either catbull.com (which credits "Unite!, Vol. 2, No. 6, December 1976-January 1977") or marxists.org (aka, "Encyclopedia of Anti-Revisionism On-Line") since the former seems to quote the latter a bit. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 07:17, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Weebly is a Wikipedia mirror. You can usually find the corresponding Wikipedia article by looking at the url. In this case, I found a lot of overlapping content that came from Spanish–American War (68.4% on Earwig's tool) and History of Cuba (90.3%). There was some copyright material copied from https://marxists.catbull.com/history/erol/ncm-3/mloc-unita.htm and I have removed it.— Diannaa (talk) 13:12, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Appreciated

For a newcomer , mistakes were make, Since, I am not familiar with wikipedia policies. I am sure , the pages you provided will help me alot to become a good contributor. Mmredblack (talk) 06:53, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

User talk:TheriusRooney

Hi there. Any idea what happened at User talk:TheriusRooney? The formatting is messed up. The revision before your change looks okay but that may be a coincidence. Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 13:45, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Checking— Diannaa (talk) 13:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

I have removed a stray nowiki tag from higher up on the page. Good catch. Thanks. — Diannaa (talk) 14:03, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Good job! I wasn't able to make out the culprit. Happy editing, Robby.is.on (talk) 14:29, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Ministry of Justice (France)

Thank you for your input, the text in question is a summary of the organisation of the minister according to the French law decrees ie texts of legal nature, the French Wikipedia uses the same exact wording from the decrees. I understand that “Content I add to Wikipedia should be written in my own words” and I tried my best but there is little room if any when it comes to judicial terms and texts of legal nature especially when translating, so I’m a bit confused how to proceed. Any advice appreciated! Thank you! Aeengath (talk) 14:28, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what happens on the French Wikipedia. If you edit the English Wikipedia you are required to follow its copyright policy. How to proceed? re-write the text in your own words.— Diannaa (talk) 19:27, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

that wasn’t the question I used paraphrasing ok but of texts of legal nature and with in-text attribution... anyway, you’re obviously too busy to check everything that the bot report thanks anyway your reply about Dorothy Davids is helpful I’ll figure it out. Aeengath (talk) 08:10, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Short properly-attributed quotations are okay, but only when there's no other alternative. Wikipedia articles are for the most part written in our own words.— Diannaa (talk) 11:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Dorothy Davids

I know it isn’t a copyright issue but if you feel it is, rather than rush to have an article about a wiki worthy subject deleted, why not improve the article to the point where you feel more comfortable? After all, wiki was made to be a collaborative effort to improve articles, not remove articles that have the potential of being better ones. Unless of course you are one of those people who proudly puts a notch on their belt when someone else’s articles are deleted when they could easily be improved. If that’s the case, go ahead. And you can teach of the infinite varieties of saying Moe graduated from x school in y year and taught at z School .... be a you must know more ways to phrase that than I do. So, please lead by example in how to reword those things.

Sorry, I had replied here earlier but for some reason it didn't get saved. The problem is that there are very few (less than five) people checking the daily copyright reports. Right now there are 72 reports on the board, which represents 7 to 14 hours of work, maybe even more if there are a lot of complicated cases. What this means in most instances is that I won't have time to re-write the article for you. Here's some advice for the future: 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. But there's no reason to try to paraphrase job titles or the names of schools or corporations. This process 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) 01:28, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Guy Nattiv

Hi, I have removed a copyright violation from Guy Nattiv. Could you revdel the revisions that contain the copied-and-pasted material from IMDb? Thanks, 153.172.208.18 (talk) 07:12, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 11:06, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Today, the same copyright violation was added by the same user again. I have already told them to stop adding copyright violation, but they keep ignoring my message. Could you revdel some more revisions? Thanks, 153.224.173.137 (talk) 10:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

This has been done by another admin (Moneytrees). Thank you, — Diannaa (talk) 18:53, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Brixham

Can you help on this? Looking at the flowery language I think it was cut and pasted from another web site back in 2006. Specifically look at how quick text was added by 86.143.196.100 on 10 March 2006. As an example a google search on the phrase in a hearse, accompanied by a bevy brings up https://www.southhams24.co.uk/item-759-brixham.html among others but this appears to be from 2010 time and wayback have never saved it. I've also checked various websites (mostly now defunct) in the hope of locating the original source but without success. Is there anything else I can do? Lyndaship (talk) 18:45, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

I have done some spot checks and am unable fo find anything that provably pre-dates the 2006 additions. After all these years it's pretty much impossible to locate a source and prove a copyvio if you don't know where to look. — Diannaa (talk) 19:09, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for checking Lyndaship (talk) 15:16, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

The use of instagram links

Hello Diannaa,

You recently removed some copyright content which I put up on the Coptic orthodox church page. Firstly, thank you for better informing me regarding the copyright rules on wikipedia.

I did notice however that you also removed links to social media pages which are relevant to some ongoing social movements. They are back up, but I thought it would be best to ask if there are any rules baring their use as sources.

Thanks in advance for your advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Titus Obelisk (talk • contribs) 09:13, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Our content guideline on reliable sources says No, Instagram and other user-generated social media are not reliable sources for use on Wikipedia.— Diannaa (talk) 18:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of section from Coptic Orthodox Church of Alexandria‎

Hello Dianna,

I noticed that you deleted an entire section from the coptic orthodox church page because it was sources from instagram. While one of the sources was in fact an instagram account which had begun a movement against sexual assault within the church,I had included a list of news articles at the beginning of the section ( including from such reliable sources as middle east eye and the LA Times which discussed the issue. I had the instagram account listed as the source throughout because it contained the largest amount of content relating to the issue and so I saw it as the blanket reference.

I will put the section back up,remove instagram as the repeated reference and use more reputable sources. Thanks --Titus Obelisk (talk) 20:25, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Titus Obelisk. That's not the way to add content to Wikipedia. Find reliable source first, then add content. This is particularly true when adding controversial content, and/or any content about living people, especially controversial content.— Diannaa (talk) 20:39, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the bother, could you clarify the issue. I am not familiar with wikipedia rules and mistakenly used instagram as a reference. The story is widely reported. should I make any changes to it as it exits now? --Titus Obelisk (talk) 20:45, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I see you are new to Wikipedia. It's a lot more complicated than you might think, with many complex rules. It's preferable for people to begin editing on non-controversial topics or subject matter rather than inserting poorly sourced controversial material. It's suggested that you find your way around first and learn the rules. Sources must be reliable. Social media is not considered a reliable source. Things like the New York Times, or The Guardian, or the Washington Post are good news sources, as are high-quality books and magazines. Please do not repeatedly restore your edit over the objections of other people. That's called edit warring, and you can be blocked for it.— Diannaa (talk) 20:52, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

What should I do if I believe that people are deleting the content for political reasons. I know you deleted it because of the problematic sourcing but if you look at the page history it has been deleted and restored multiple times ( with a few restorations being from other members). The wikipedia page is truly reflecting the controversial nature of the topic — Preceding unsigned comment added by Titus Obelisk (talk • contribs) 20:59, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

I would like to note that the information is not "controversial." It is widely reported- its just that the unpleasant nature of the scandal tarnishes the church's image and hardliners want to keep it clean. Some of us would like reform. thanks again for the advice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Titus Obelisk (talk • contribs) 21:02, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

United States soccer league system

you commented to me about using copyrighted info, so I have a few questions. The info I added was taken from a source already referenced on the page United States soccer league system#Structure , so i didn't think it would be a problem. Is that not the case? Also, the info isn't owned by that site, it's from the US Soccer Federation, but not published by them for public consumption. I knew if I didn't reference anything I'd get a comment also so I used the same URL citation as further up in the article. How do we handle a citation like that?

let me know how to handle re-using a citation for the next time, thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AndyinSoCal (talk • contribs) 14:41, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

I did realize that the blog post is a copy of the rules, not the original document, which is not available online. The blog where I found it is not the copyright holder; the US Soccer Federation is the copyright holder. Regardless, we can't copy their documents to Wikipedia, because they are copyright.— Diannaa (talk) 14:50, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Marine Industries Organization

Hi. Can you please clarify how could I rewrite that exact part in my own words? Are names of products (tug, patrol boat, destroyer, etc.), copyrighted? What if the order of names are not the same as the source, is that OK? Pahlevun (talk) 16:48, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

This is non-alphabetical lists copied directly from the source website. It's difficult to paraphrase or summarize such material. But I don't see any reason why the material needs to be included at all. — Diannaa (talk) 16:57, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Frankly speaking, I am still not persuaded that my edit was a copyright violation. Order of some names are either copyrighted or not (I am sure that those names are not). I want to clear up the problem. Pahlevun (talk) 17:23, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Pahlevun I agree with you. Your edit should not be a copyright violation at all. It's like saying "1990, 1991, 1992, 1993" and so on is copyrighted simply because some source says this. Your edit should be restored. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:43, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)It is pretty borderline. How about summarize/paraphrase what you can, omit some of each list, and/or alphabetize each list. I am not too keen on globalsecurity.org today, as they have not taken steps to update their security certificates.— Diannaa (talk) 19:02, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

It would be easier to paraphrase / write your own content if you had multiple sources to draw from.— Diannaa (talk) 19:07, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Your message on my talk page

Hello again. I got this message on my talk page. I appreciate you bringing the matter up to me again but I did provide attribution. I said in my edit summary "Credit to all respective Wikipedians for all their help." Is this not sufficient accreditation? Also on a separate note, some of the events you are likely asking me to provide attribution for I added to the 2020 page! I don't know what the issue is. Sorry for any troubles. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 16:58, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

No it is not sufficient attribution. You need to mention in the edit summary each article from which you copied. Here's the recommended edit summary: Copied content from [[<page name>]]; see that page's history for attribution.— Diannaa (talk) 18:39, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa can you at least give me 5 alternative sentence samples for the one you just gave me? The sentence sample you said sounds very empty and lifeless. There should be alternative sentences that fulfill the accreditation you are telling me about that are more sincere. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 18:46, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I am not going to give you five unique upbeat and cheery ways to provide the legally required attribution. — Diannaa (talk) 19:05, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok then, thanks for the help you have given me. It's "very" helpful. Dan the Animator (Commons Room) 19:13, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose International Airport

I wonder if you could give me your opinion on the article Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose International Airport which is due to appear on the main page as a DYK in two days time. I ran an Earwig check on it and it appears to be a serious copyvio of this site. Now I wouldn't have thought the international airport site would copy Wikipedia, however it seems to me that it has done. The main History section of the article was rewritten with this edit on 22 November 2011, and it looks like a genuine creation of new text to me, but I would be glad of your expert opinion. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:49, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

The airoprt website also uses many of the same photos (which were definitely taken by Wikipedians), has a copy of part of the infobox, and includes a table of contents. It's a Wikipedia mirror.— Diannaa (talk) 13:21, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 17:05, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Danish Dance Theatre history

Hello, I think that the copyvio removal of edit histories at Danish Dance Theatre should be expanded back to this version: Special:Diff/422846555 and up to Special:PermanentLink/918900272#Dancers. The dancer bios that you removed in the next edit look to be copy/pasted verbatim from the external links provided at each name. These links don't work anymore, so I found this going to the WayBack Machine (e.g.: here). This RfD may provide some additional context: Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 July 16#Danish Dance Theatre Dancers. Just wanted to let you know. —2pou (talk) 20:07, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

These Wayback versions are 5 years after the insertion in Wikipedia. So it's not conclusive. Regardless, it's a bit much to hide an additional 2 years of the page history. So no, I am not going to do it, but thank you for the suggestion.— Diannaa (talk) 22:36, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright question

Diannaa, you seem to know about copyright questions. Can you please review my edit? I removed a lot in this edit [7]. I remember reading somewhere that a translation could be copyrighted if it is very long or posted in full. But I'm not sure if this is a standard used for Wikipedia! I don't want to delete anyones addition if it's not truly copyrighted. Clara Wiley (talk) 01:54, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

It would depend on the year of publication. If you can't determine what year it was published, it's best to take it out. If you do know the year and country of publication, you can check the Hirtle chart at the Commons.— Diannaa (talk) 04:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Beni Takemata

Hi Diannaa. Would you mind taking a look at this to see if a WP:REVDEL is needed? I believe the editor who made the edit is well meaning, but wasn't quite aware of WP:TFOLWP and WP:MACHINETRANSLATION. FWIW, I've been trying to incoporate some of the content found in the Japanese Wikipedia article about Takemata into the English Wikipedia one, but lots of it is trivial and poorly sourced. and still needs to be sorted out. It seems that the same editor might have tried to do something similar with respect to Shining Soriana, which is now being discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shining Soriana. In that case, the Japanese Wikipedia article that this editor created has been flagged as a copyvio which means some of this editor's other edits might also need to be a closer look as well. FWIW, this editors habit of marking everything as a minor edit and their English ability are concerns as well, but those are things that probably can be cleaned up without too much difficulty. It's the unsourced content and possible copyvios that might need more sorting out. I'm aware of Template:Welcomeen-ja, but I don't know if there's an equivalent that deals more specifically with copyvios, etc. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:36, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

It's unattributed copying, not a copyright violation per se, unless the article that's been translated contains copyvio. I think removing it is sufficient for now, unless copyvio is proven. I have checked Template:Welcome-copyright, Template:Uw-copyright-new and Template:Uw-copyright and Template:Welcomelaws but none of them seem to have a Japanese version available. — Diannaa (talk) 19:25, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Understand and thank you for taking a look. I think the original Japanese article is fine from a copyvio standpoint. It existed long before this editor created a Japanese Wikipedia account (at least before they created an account in this name). Does attribution still need to be provided for old versions found in the page’s history? If it was a machine translation, then it was a pretty bad one which would pretty much require a total rewrite in order to incorporate into the article. I’ve got no intention of doing that; I only use whatever sources from Japanese Wikipedia that are usable and then create new content reflecting them. So, I won’t reuse any of the content that editor added. I can’t say, however, whether someone else might try to reuse it in some way. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:13, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Technically yes, I think attribution should be provided even though the material has been removed, since the old revisions still exist.— Diannaa (talk) 11:51, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Concern about possible copyright issue

I ought to be able to handle this myself but I'm a little too close to it, so I would be grateful if you could take a peek.

I decided to work on some math articles that are under referenced. In many cases, there is a decent exposition at Mathworld

However, in some cases the material is uncomfortably similar. Some of these articles have been in Wikipedia for 15 years, but Wayback suggests that the comparable entry in math world predates that.

Here are two examples that have me concerned:

• Lucas_chain
• LucasChain at Mathworld
• Wayback 2004

• Lehmer sequence
• LehmerNumber at Mathworld
• Wayback 2004

I can make the argument that unlike an event in history or a biography of a person, where one can make the same statement in very different words and thereby avoid a copyright infringement, there is a need in mathematics to be exact about a formula and that may be less ability to rewrite without looking very similar. I'm not fully persuaded by that argument. As I said, I'm worried I'm too close to it and hope you could take a look to see if you are concerned.

Also pinging @Moneytrees and L3X1: --S Philbrick(Talk) 20:55, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

If we're talking about a particular formula I would expect it to be identical or extremely similar in various sources. so for example for Lehmer sequence we find the same formulas in this paper as we do at MathWorld and Wikipedia. What I would be more concerned about is if the descriptive prose or examples are copied from somewhere else. — Diannaa (talk) 11:49, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Diannaa, Thanks. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:14, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright at AfD

Hi Diannaa and Moneytrees and Justlettersandnumbers. I don't think any of you regularly close AfDs but I think Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sunday Times Rich List 1989 could likely use a closer who is going to be able to accurately assess the weight of the various claims around copyright when determining consensus and since you 3 are the three sysops I think of working Copyright, I'm hoping I might be able to entice one of you to close it. I am myself uninvolved and was getting ready to close it when I decided it could perhaps use some extra expertise. Given my own uninvolved status and my appeal to multiple sysops I think I am on OK canvass grounds. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:29, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Barkeep49, note that the afd was nac'd as keep; I personally don't think that those are copyvios, since it's just a list... although I'm more of an idealist when it comes to copyright than others. Moneytrees🏝️^{Talk🌴Help out at CCI!} 22:20, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I was going to close it as keep but then decided I perhaps needed to weigh the COPYVIO concerns more. Glad to hear that turned out OK. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:16, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I have no experience in closing AFDs or even commenting on them, so I'm glad someone else looked after it.— Diannaa (talk) 22:29, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyvio

I can't really tell what is going on with the following articles, but the user has already been warned (once, twice) about copyvio and I think you already did some revdel at my request. Earwig reports for three articles: Vasiliy Ryabchenko, Stepan Ryabchenko and Lucien Dulfan. I also suspect some COI with this user and have filed it at COIN. Thanks. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:18, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Problems on Vasiliy Ryabchenko date back to the very first revision. Some of the overlapping content was added by Art of Odessa, but most was not. The early content was added by somebody else (user:Рябченко Василий Сергеевич - this is likely Vasiliy Ryabchenko himself according to Google translate). Lucien Dulfan is a false positive. I have cleaned the other two. Thank you for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 19:51, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. The Russian-spelled account that you mention above was blocked as a sock of Art of Odessa on Commons, so i assume it is the same user as Art of Odessa.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:04, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Рябченко Василий Сергеевич is actually the older account, by one day. Both accounts were created on ru.wiki. Рябченко Василий Сергеевич has not edited on en.wiki since 2017.— Diannaa (talk) 22:21, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

thanks

is a nightmare to have on watch, there's always something going on like that (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Australian_Chamber_of_Mines_and_Energy) - thanks JarrahTree 13:44, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyvio on talk page

Hi Diannaa, see here, which is a copyvio of Britannica's article on Jamaica. Also, is there a simple way to tag or report such copyvios? Thanks. BilCat (talk) 19:57, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

That was fast! Thanks very much. BilCat (talk) 20:06, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

(ec) Thanks for your interest in copyright cleanup. This one is done. What to do when you spot a copyvio? (1) Remove the violation. (2) Tag the page for revision deletion using the template {{Copyvio-revdel}}. There's a script for revdel tagging at User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel. Please consider watch-listing the page until the revision deletion is done. Alternatively, if you find the template awkward/difficult to use, you can post here and the revision deletion will be done by me or by one of my talk page watchers. Needed are the first and last diffs to be hidden and the source where you found the overlapping content. — Diannaa (talk) 20:08, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'll look at that script to see if I'd like to install it. BilCat (talk) 20:11, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Guiyang Commandery redirect

Hi Diannaa, I hope all is well with you. A user recently created a redirect for the (ancient) Guiyang Commandery to go to the history section of the modern day city of Leiyang, which was only a tiny part of this ancient commandery/county (the words appear to be often used interchangeably). I wonder if this fits the criteria for speedy deletion since the Chinese wikipedia has an article for Guiyang County/commandery (here) and the redirect prevents a user from translating or making an equivalent article. If need be I'll bring it up at WP:RFD but a speedy deletion seems more appropriate, thought I'd check first. Aza24 (talk) 23:43, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

The redirect does not meet any of the criteria for speedy deletion. And it does not prevent an article from being written with that title. — Diannaa (talk) 11:42, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Neurofeedback

Hello, Diannaa. Thank you for your comments on the neurofeedback article regarding my edits. You're correct, I did use portions of text from academic papers. My main intention for revamping the neurofeedback page was because whoever wrote it originally evidently did so with considerable negative bias and a lack of understanding of the state of the literature. The current article is so bad that the topic would be better served if it had only a definition and nothing else. I am a neuroscientist and I do research with TMS and fMRI so I understand how misconstruing information like this can be damaging for not only those seeking treatment but for the state of research as a whole. The reason I bring this up is because the changes you made removed the public source material which was correct and restored portions of text which are at best misleading and at worst blatantly false. I don't expect you to go through my edits with a fine toothed comb, but I at least hope in reading my additions you see there is more to them than one big copyright claim. I feel that the lines I used from various meta-studies and experiments accurately summarized much of the existing work. This is a rapidly evolving area and it deserves more than what is currently being displayed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IsUnsigned (talk • contribs) 01:46, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry but all I did was remove material that you had copied here from a copyright journal article. If there's incorrect text in the article, it should be removed of course, but I did not put it there. — Diannaa (talk) 11:53, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Donating copyrighted materials

At the end of June, Professor Ray made a submission to WP:Donating copyrighted materials as per your instructions.

You wrote: "I will not be corresponding directly with Ray. Here's what to ask him to do: follow the instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted materials. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent.— Diannaa (talk) 10:43, 29 June 2020 (UTC)".

His submission is still appearing in category "Items pending OTRS confirmation of permission for over 30 days".

When can he expect an answer?

PuedaHacer (talk) 06:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher)(Non-administrator comment) Hi PuedaHacer. When someone emails WP:OTRS, I believe they usually get a automatic reply back that says their email has been received and also are given an OTRS ticket number. This ticket number is sort of like a "case number" and it can be used by the person who sent the email to try and find out more information. Because OTRS emails usually contain private information, they can only be viewed by OTRS volunteers; moreover, an OTRS volunteer will not discuss anything specific about the contents of an email anywhere on Wikipedia. So, the first thing you might try doing is finding out if Professor Ray got such a reply from OTRS. If they did, then they can probably just email OTRS again (using the same email address as before) and ask for an update. You might be able to find out some very general information at WP:OTRSN if you know the OTRS ticket number, but an OTRS volunteer might not be able to post too much. On the other hand, if Ray never got a reply, then they might try checking their email account's "sent" folder to see if the email was actually sent to the correct address.

Please note that in some cases a Wikipedia administrator might also be an OTRS volunteer, but administrators aren't automatically given that WP:USERRIGHT and those which do have it cannot publicly discuss the contents of the emails they see. I'm not sure whether Diannaa is an OTRS volunteer, but she probably can discuss any details with you even if she is. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:33, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello PuedaHacer. I see by Draft talk:Sumantra Ray that the OTRS ticket was added at the end of June. The tag says the backlog is currently 57 days so someone should be getting to it soon. I am not an OTRS volunteer and don't have access to their email queue.— Diannaa (talk) 11:48, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

EPN sock?

Do you think it's possible that EsotericJoe is an EnglishPatriotMan sock? He's edited Rassenschande, Margaret Thatcher, Elvis Presley and Arthur de Gobineau, all EPN favorites. Beyond My Ken (talk) 17:23, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Not to mention several Nazi Germany related articles, which EPN favored. Kierzek (talk) 17:51, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Comparing with the two most recent named accounts is convincing as well. Blocked.— Diannaa (talk) 21:28, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I have to go out, no time right now to reverse any edits. Please feel free to do this step, or not.— Diannaa (talk) 21:35, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm working on it, will probably do more tomorrow. Thanks for updating the list. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:15, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

The list is very useful. Thanks for setting it up.— Diannaa (talk) 11:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Our Lady of Medjugorje

Can you tell me, what content exactly? I was very careful, so I doubt I made any violations. Please, indicate to me, what part of text is problematic, and I'll sort it out. Thank you! --Governor Sheng (talk) 20:49, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view what the bot found. The prose has been only superficially paraphrased, with the same content being presented in the same order with only a few words substituted. That's not okay.— Diannaa (talk) 21:19, 16 August 2020 (UTC)

Ok, point taken. Thank you for your advice. I will rewrite the problematic part. --Governor Sheng (talk) 03:24, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thanks for the guidance about citation and content policy on Wikipedia.

Chinmay (talk) 04:07, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Request to check my attempt at incorporating CC4.0 material on a page

Hi! You have helped me in the past with public domain material. Right now I am incorporating CC4.0 material in a page, Energy diplomacy. I am basically doing straight copy and paste, but converting academic citations to Wikipedia citations, cutting footnotes and figues and then amending the text. Do I have to mention this in notes? Johncdraper (talk) 08:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

No you don't.— Diannaa (talk) 11:20, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Apollonia (Cyrenaica)

Hi, I am the sole owner and author of http://www.ancientportsantiques.com/a-few-ports/apollonia/ and I feel free to copy from it! Can you please tell me more about "releasing under a compatible license" so I can perhaps change this on my web site? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artreve (talk • contribs) 09:32, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Right now each page of the website says at the bottom "© 2020 Ancient Ports – Ports Antiques". One way to make it available to us is to remove that and replace it with a compatible license. Alternatively, send an email to the OTRS team specifying which license you are using. See WP:DONATETEXT for detailed instructions.— Diannaa (talk) 11:30, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Friendly and helpful. Very much appreciated! Ryancoke2020 (talk) 19:03, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Thank you!— Diannaa (talk) 19:18, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Bel Decomposition

Hi Diannaa, I received your message on the use of "copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released" in the Bel decomposition. As explained in the Talk:Bel decomposition topic, I did not write that content, in part or in whole. Each of the lines I added had was the content of its own individual article that seems to have all been started by the same user in 2006 (with a disclaimer in the talk pages of the original author stating to no longer trust the content of the pages) Each of these sub-articles had a single sentence and no references. I therefore used the blank-and-redirect technique to erase their one line each and moved those unreferenced lines into the Bel decomposition article. Your reversion of my edit replaced the links to the non-existent pages. And your comments about the copyrighted nature without references apply to the original sub-articles, which I previously blanked-and-redirected into Bel decomposition. I apologize if this wasn't done appropriately, but I noticed the other articles did not meet standards for Wikipedia, such as Notability and Verifiability and assumed no one would object to their blank-and-redirect status. I am not sure what to do about the pages, but I figured I would let you know they are messed up. Also, I would prefer to not be "blocked" just for trying to help. I did start a talk page topic that discussed this issue whenever I made the change. Footlessmouse (talk) 19:07, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry for the mistake. In the future, when copying within Wikipedia, please add attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. Please have a look at this edit summary as an example of how it is done. You did hint at it in your edit summary but I did not understand what you meant. Thanks, — Diannaa (talk) 19:17, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, I apologize for that, I went back to read about blank-and-redirect and it did say that when merging content I need to specify it explicitly in the summary so that it is easily tracked, it even gives an example. I am still learning the ropes, but should have read that more thoroughly. Thanks for understanding. Footlessmouse (talk) 23:28, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

page protection

Hi. I saw you as recently active, hence contacting you. Would you please decrease the move protection level of Wikipedia:Transclusion, and Help:Transclusion to extended confirmed so that I can swap them, and perform other "post move clean-up edits"? You can see the RM at Special:Permalink/973707206#Requested move 11 August 2020. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:36, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Help:Transclusion does not appear to be moved protected and I am pretty sure it would not need to be moved. The protection log for Wikipedia:Transclusion states that the page is "linked in mediawiki interface". I don't know what that means or whether or not it is still true. So I have not done anything. — Diannaa (talk) 20:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Possible COPYVIO

Hello Diannaa, a recently added image in the Medgar Evers article appears to be under copyright. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 20:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Image is on the Commons. File:PHO-09Feb11-150096.jpg. There's no evidence of permission. I have nominated it for deletion. Thank you,— Diannaa (talk) 20:08, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Madonna

Back as "Madonna The Queen". Beyond My Ken (talk) 15:53, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright for English recordings

Hello Dianna. Could I ask for your help again please? In adding to the "His Masters Voice" wikipedia page, i want to post links to sound recordings this company published in England up until the 1920s. Sources would include the British Library and YouTube. Would this be permitted? thank you for considering. best wishes, User:Stuart1900. —Preceding undated comment added 07:33, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

It's okay to supply links as long as the source webpage has permission to host the links. The British Library should be okay, but each YouTube link would need to be assessed individually.— Diannaa (talk) 12:37, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

thank you very much for your time and advice, Dianna. Stuart1900 (talk) 06:59, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Copyright

All the content I added to Students for Justice in Palestine was written by me and I didn't paste anything. Are you perhaps looking at a bot that reports possible copyright violations? That bot appears to not take quotations into account and therefore reports loads of copyright violations when there are none. ImTheIP (talk) 13:22, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Sorry but the passage was not marked as being a quotation. I have temporarily undone the revision deletion so you can review.— Diannaa (talk) 13:43, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Is it this revision? I admit that the three first sentences resembles sentences on page 223 of that book as I used that book as a source, but I didn't copy them (you can't copy-paste from Google books). I tried to be careful and rephrase them enough to not run afoul of copyright issues. ImTheIP (talk) 15:03, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

The content is on page 223-224. Your edit presented the same ideas in the same order using almost identical text. That's a violation of our copyright policy. Your version:

Weeks before the event, public debate about it broke out which attracted national media attention. Opponents criticized the Political Science department for co-sponsoring the event and called for it to withdraw its sponsorship. Among them were the Anti-Defamation League, several assemblymen, ten members of the City Council and right-wing political commentator Alan Dershowitz who called the event an "anti-Israel hatefest." City Council members threatened to withhold funding to BC unless they cancelled the event. The event, however, took place with around 200 attendees and 150 anti-BDS protestors who had gathered outside.

From the book:

Weeks before the event, a sharp public debate broke out which attracted national media attention. Opponents criticized the department for co-sponsoring and called for it to cancel the event or withdraw the sponsorship. Among them were the Anti-Defamation League, mayoral candidate William Johnson Jr, several assemblymen, ten members of the City Council who wrote an open letter to the college's president, and right-wing political commentator Alan Dershowitz who called the event an "anti-Israel hatefest." Anti-BDS students circulated a petition and City Council members threatened to withhold funding to to all of Brooklyn college unless the conference was cancelled. [...] In the end, the panel took place with police outside checking bags of the 200 attendees whose names were on an approved list, as 150 anti-BDS protestors gathered outside the building.

Overlapping content is highlighted in bold.— Diannaa (talk) 15:32, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

It is the same ideas in the same order because both texts describe the same event. The text is similar to the source because that is how citations work. For example, I cannot write "many assemblymen, ten members of the City Council" instead of "several assemblymen, ten members of the City Council" because that would be presenting a claim not supported by the source: many != several. Reformulations of a few sentences that follow the original source are common in academia and I don't think they violate wiki policy. If you don't mind, I'll try and get a second opinion. ImTheIP (talk) 15:48, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't mind at all. Please go ahead and do that.— Diannaa (talk) 15:53, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) ImTheIP, I'll offer you a second opinion. The relevant wording at our CV policy is Even inserting text copied with some changes can be a copyright violation if there is substantial linguistic similarity in creative language or sentence structure; this is known as close paraphrasing, which can also raise concerns about plagiarism. In my view, the content you added is a very close paraphrasing of the book's content; whether that is common in academia is moot, it is a violation of our policy. The content would need to be substantially reworded to be compliant. GirthSummit _(blether) 15:56, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) The above example of close copying without proper paraphrasing (Weeks before the event, public debate about it broke out...) might indeed be a common practice in academia, where it is called plagiarism.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:04, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes, when you don't cite your sources. But the point is that I did use the "ref" syntax to link to the page of the book I used as a source. This is permissible by copyright law and I'd argue that it is also proper source usage. The text you are writing must of course reflect the content of the source, meaning that its structure necessarily will be similar to the source. Here, we're talking about three rephrased sentences and a fourth separated by ellipsis, there is in my mind no way that this is a copyright violation.ImTheIP (talk) 16:26, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

This is about as plain of an example of plagiarism as one could get. Citing your sources does not mean you can copy phrases and sentences directly and close paraphrase them, obviously. Matching sections of text of ore than 3 words or so should be within quotes. As Oxford university says you must ensure that you do not create the misleading impression that the paraphrased wording or the sequence of ideas are entirely your own. Anyone can see that the (Weeks before the event...) example above has not been properly attributed: they look like a wiki editor wrote them, but the majority of the text actually came from the book's author. Removing this copyvio from the WP article is the correct thing to do. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 16:31, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

ImTheIP Again, the idea of whether this is common practice is beside the point - it is a breach of our policy, and is not permissible. Please accept that, rewrite your content, and don't do it again. Cheers GirthSummit _(blether) 16:40, 23 August 2020 (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. You must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. The material that I removed was 91 words that are almost identical to a passage in a copyright book, without quotation marks to indicate that it was a direct quote. That's a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Quoting this passage is not a good alternative, because it could fairly easily be re-written into copyright-compliant prose.— Diannaa (talk) 18:55, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

1957 Ramnad riots

Hi Diannaa. I'm wondering if you'd mind checking on WP:THQ#Copy paste content. I first did an Earwig with the url the OP provided, but it came up as this, which doesn't seem to be a problem. However, I then is a more general Earwig search and came up with this, which does seem like quite a problem. Earwig seems to have found a September 2019 blog which is quite similar to the Wikipedia article. After looking at the article's history I found this August 2019 version of the same section which seems to pre-date the blog post; so, I'm not sure if the blog actually got the content from Wikipedia. I'm not sure I've done all of this correctly, but I even more not sure about what (if anything) should be done next. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:09, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly. Both of the pages listed on the Earwig report are Wikipedia mirrors. We've had most of this content since 2006. — Diannaa (talk) 12:01, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:School of Engineering, JNU

Hello Diana, I saw your messages.I am not sure that what I am doing is plagarism, the page I am writing about is my college (School of Engineering) it is a government college in New Delhi, India. All information I have written in my page is available in public domain such as brochures, website etc. I have tried citing news and articles. Can you please point out in detail what seems to be plagarised(if possible). I am willing to change the wordings but they would ultimately convey the same information. I look forward to become a good editor and I dont want to be banned. The content I am writing is available in public domain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnuite (talk • contribs) 15:02, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Being publicly available is not the same thing as being in the public domain. 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. — Diannaa (talk) 15:11, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

August

August

Thank you for the sad fish image! - MP 24 August has one of "my places" (click on August) pictured. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Today: Rhythm Is It! - I expanded that stub on my dad's birthday because we saw the film together back then, and were impressed. As a ref said: every educator should see it. Don't miss the trailer, for a starter. - A welcome chance to present yet another article by Brian on the Main page, Le Sacre du printemps. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the interesting info Gerda. I will have a look at this later.— Diannaa (talk) 13:05, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Possible COPYVIO 2

Hi Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of potential copyright violation in Transient expression. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 12:35, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for reporting— Diannaa (talk) 12:56, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Certified Professional Coder

Hi Dianaa,

Thanks for your comments on, Most of this was copied from Clinical coder. — Diannaa (talk) 15:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC).

I have added attribution in edit summary section. Jamesinhere (talk) 15:54, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Copy and paste of a campaign website

Hi Diannaa. I've come across a bit of an odd situation. So, the Michelle De La Isla page (she is the Mayor of Topeka, Kansas and is running for Congress) had some red flags that looked to me like they might be copyright issues. I checked out her campaign bio, and sure enough, there were portions that were directly lifted. See this version of the page from November 2018--it's just a copy and paste of her campaign bio. Now, it gets a little weirder because at her campaign bio they are actually linking back to her Wikipedia article. The links in her bio are inter-Wikipedia links. And the hot-linked footnotes track back to the footnotes on her Wikipedia page. Weird, right? So it's like a campaign staffer wrote her Wikipedia page and then made the official campaign bio into a mirror of Wikipedia? Anyway, wanted to get your thoughts on the situation. In the mean time, I left a note on the article talk page and put a COI tag on the article. Marquardtika (talk) 19:06, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Here's a source that is a match, and pre-dates the addition of the "humble beginnings" version to Wikipedia: https://web.archive.org/web/20180713232019/https://www.topeka.org/mayor/. The current version looks okay from a copyright point of view. — Diannaa (talk) 21:22, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

New article

Can you take a look at Al Busaidi House. Much/most is a copy/paste of House of Al Said and I don't see any attribution. Despite apparently having gone through AFC, I'm not even sure what is going on here. Is the subject sufficiently different or is there more work to be done. Something is not Kosher. Thanks. MB 17:49, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Britannica calls them "Āl Bū Saʿīd dynasty, also spelled Al Busaidi" so we may have our article at the wrong title. Rewgardless, this is an inappropriate way to do a page move, so I have turned the new article into a redirect to the original.— Diannaa (talk) 19:00, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Query about the copyright status of a book

Hello, Diannaa. This query is regarding a book authored by Jadunath Sarkar (died: 1958) as a historian of the Jaipur royal family – links of the book: [8] & [9]. Sarkar was commissioned by Man Singh II to write the history of his ancestors, and the manuscript was completed by him in 1940: [10]. But its publication got delayed by over four decades. It was published for the first time in 1984 in revised and edited form, and is copyrighted to "Maharaja Sawai Man Singh II Museum". Here's its review: [11]. Its editor notes that the author had misrepresented documents multiple times, which he has fixed: [12]. He also states that he fully revised the dates in the book.

So, is this book copyrighted now? If not, was it copyrighted in 2008? - NitinMlk (talk) 17:31, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

To answer this question, we use the Hirtle chart. It says that for works created before 1978 and first published with notice outside the US from 1 January 1978 through 28 February 1989, copyright protection exists until 31 December 2047. Yes, it enjoyed copyright protection in 2008. — Diannaa (talk) 23:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! - NitinMlk (talk) 16:48, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

photos not uploaders own work

Hi. Just a few minutes ago, an editor Evelynbreit1 uploaded a few photos, and then added them to The Not-Too-Late Show with Elmo. They are obviously not the copyright owner, but I am not sure if the photos are in public domain, or copyrighted. From the looks of it, the editor seems to be a kid; and I didnt know how to approach. However, I left them this message. Would you kindly take a look into the photos? And if possible, would you please converse with the editor in question in normal way? I mean, avoiding the templates, and other wiki jargons? I have also watchlisted their talkpage, so I will be around as well. Thanks a lot in advance. —usernamekiran (talk) 22:19, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Hi usernamekiran. The images were uploaded to the Commons. They are screen shots of a copyright TV show and/or are promotional shots for the show, and we will not be able to keep them. Unfortunately this might come as a bit of a shock to them. I will tag them on the Commons and leave them a message there as to why it has to be done.— Diannaa (talk) 23:56, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

thanks. It is appreciated a lot.
the way, did you know I'm auto patrolled on commons? Hehe
See you around :) —usernamekiran (talk) 00:30, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

On the Commons, I am "filemover, patroller, rollbacker". Oh by the way that looks like a hella good TV show; I gotta get me some HBO.— Diannaa (talk) 00:35, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

yes, it is. There are some snippets on YouTube. Hoda Kotb's show has uploaded a clip of Elmo's show of minute or two, after she had been on the show. It was actually a reference within her show, "yay, I was interviewed by Elmo". Felt like cross-promotion. But still, it's totally worth watching. Random YouTube users keep uploading full length shows, but YouTube takes them down. Fortunately, I got to see two episodes that way. And yes, I just saw your user rights from commons when you were in the middle of editing on commons. Appearances of Jimmy Fallon, John Mulaney, and John Oliver are good too. I was hoping to see Stephen Colbert on Elmo's show, that's how I had first found about Elmo's show; from Colbert's show. But then I realised Sesame street, and Ed Sullivan Theater must be far away. —usernamekiran (talk) 00:59, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Sinap, Erdemli

Hi, I have removed a chunk of Turkish text added to Sinap, Erdemli on 6 April 2020‎. Earwig suggests that it was copied, possibly from https://www.facebook.com/Ali-Ceran-Ceran-Fidan-1366197393523823/groups. Please can you revdel if appropriate. The editor only edited on 6 April so I have not warned them. TSventon (talk) 11:04, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for reporting.— Diannaa (talk) 12:36, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Editing

Hi Diannaa. I hope you've been well. It's been nearly a year and a half since I agreed to stop editing the page Vivienne Goonewardene (due to my work being based on copyrighted content). Since then, I've significantly developed in terms of my work, and now have a GA, and another GA waiting to be reviewed under my belt. I was hoping to seek your permission to begin re-editing the page, piece by piece. I'm aiming to get this article to GA, and the article is covered under Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red. I just wanted to write my assurance that I am fully aware of Wikipedia guidelines, and that the article will contain nothing of my previous mistakes, from which I have learned from. Be assured, I'll be completely averse to copyrighted content – otherwise this will never pass as a GA! Best, SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 12:00, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I did not forbid you to edit the article, I only suggested it was not a good idea to do so. Besides, you have been editing the article, since April. So Why are you asking me.— Diannaa (talk) 12:27, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

I just wanted to make it clear that I am now completely aware of the rules, and that I intend to do this article correctly. (I was hoping to disclose that I aimed to start editing again now, in order to avoid any confusion in the future). Thanks anyway! SerAntoniDeMiloni (talk) 12:44, 30 August 2020 (UTC)

Shyamala Gopalan

Hello Diannaa, If you have the time, can you please evaluate the references in this biography of Kamala Harris's mother, and comment on the talk page? In my opinion, there are so many quotations from a single Los Angeles Times article that it constitutes a copyright violation. I count 27 sentences copied from the newspaper article into the references. I would appreciate your expert assessment. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:50, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

It's not a violation of the copyright policy per se, but it's excessive non-free content and a violation of our non-free content policy. I have fixed it up.— Diannaa (talk) 12:43, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

Deleted?

Which thing i did copyright? I have just put some texts that should be added. Can i know which thing i did copy and paste? Cz I totally write myself though get some info from other website. But i didn't copied thoroughly. Please kindly provide appropriate answers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OfficialHridayKundu (talk • contribs) 16:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)

One whole paragraph was identical to text found at https://www.holderspestsolutions.com/pest-library/cockroaches/oriental-cockroaches. It's the paragraph under the header "What Kind Of Threat Do Oriental Cockroaches Pose?".

Also, please note that pest control websites cannot be considered reliable sources for information about insects on Wikipedia. Please find journal articles, books, or other high-quality sources if adding content about science-related topics. For medical-related topics, we have strict rules about sourcing. See WP:MEDRS for more information about sourcing for medical information.— Diannaa (talk) 16:33, 31 August 2020 (UTC)