User talk:Chee Cheong Fun

Copying within Wikipedia

You did not identify the source of the material in your edit. It appears to be Kubernetes. Copying within Wikipedia is acceptable but it must be attributed.

This type of edit does get picked up by Copy Patrol and a good edit summary helps to make sure we don't accidentally revert it. However, for future use, would you note the best practices wording as outlined at Wikipedia:Copying_within_Wikipedia? In particular, linking to the source article and adding the phrase "see that page's history for attribution" helps ensure that proper attribution is preserved.

While best practices are that attribution should be added to the edit summary at the time the edit is made, the linked article on best practices describes the appropriate steps to add attribution after the fact. I hope you will do so.

I've noticed that this guideline is not very well known, even among editors with tens of thousands of edits, so it isn't surprising that I point this out to some veteran editors, but there are some t's that need to be crossed.S Philbrick (Talk) 13:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there @Sphilbrick! Thanks for the information, duly noted. However, I fail to see which portion of the text added was lifted verbatim or copied from another Wikipedia article. Maybe I am missing something, could you share the source article which you feel the text was copied from? Chee Cheong Fun (talk) 14:00, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just as one example, your edit and the linked Wikipedia article both contain the following exact sentence:

>Examples of problems solved by operators include taking and restoring backups of that application's state, and handling upgrades of the application code alongside related changes such as database schemas or extra configuration settings. S Philbrick (Talk) 17:44, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, which is the linked Wikipedia article? Also, this sentence wasn't written by me, I merely added a paragraph break before this sentence... Chee Cheong Fun (talk) 17:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at CopyPatrol, and the offending edits seem to be these two: (1) (2)

However, the supposed "copied" sources seem to have copied the original Wikipedia article first:

https://handwiki.org/wiki/Software:Kubernetes seems to have copied the article from a while ago
http://en.turkcewiki.org/wiki/Kubernetes seems to be an up-to-date Wikipedia mirror (reflecting my changes as soon as 24 hours within it going live)

I'd like to understand, how does this constitute "copying within Wikipedia"? Additionally, is CopyPatrol able to filter out simple paragraph breaks or formatting changes (i.e. a smarter diff) to avoid false positives? More importantly, what's CopyPatrol's policy (or your team's policy) to handle sites which blatantly copy the entire article into their own page?

I can vouch that all of my edits were written by myself, so I am pretty puzzled on these forms of auto-moderation tooling, which doesn't seem to be sufficiently cover cases as basic as simple paragraph breaks. Chee Cheong Fun (talk) 18:10, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for December 16

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 16 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]