User talk:Butseriouslyfolks/Archive 1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Welcome!
Hello, Butseriouslyfolks, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- How to edit a page
- Help pages
- Tutorial
- How to write a great article
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome! Agent 86 20:26, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
thanks for pointing out that I'd left off my copyright info on a recent picture I posted rather than just quashing it. I probably shouldn't wiki while I have the flu, but at least it is not contagious here. Oh yes, your User page by-line reminded me of the Oscar Wilde quote, 'The Truth is seldom pure and never simple." Carptrash 15:50, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- You're doing just fine, And as for all the rules, well remember the line from The Pirates of the Carribean - something like "Rules? Well they are more like guidelines." - that's how things are here. Most folks are much more concerned with your attitude and intentions than with the letter of the law. At least with the bunch I hang out with. Carptrash 17:19, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 17:29, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Horseshoe Theory
The original article was deleted because it contained original research. As you can see, this new shortened article does not, it merely provides an entry on an established political term. I wouldtherefore appreciate that you do not delate the article. Table08
DCLA
Hi
I wonder if you could help,I have been trying to create a page for our Laboratory but it keeps getting deleted because it looks like it is infringing on DCLA copy write.
Can you help me or can you tell me who to contact so it doesn't keep happening
Michael Cohen DCLA
Copyright vio
Your editing of my contributions is unfounded. I was told by other users that I needed to include a link to the original sources, which I have done in all cases. My insitution has given permission for this material to be placed on wikipedia. I have emailed WP with this information and am simply waiting to hear back from them. mdazey
hah
touchè.
Copyright ???
I am the Author of mine article, copy from mu own source........
Lots of personnal contents of mine, have already been copied to here (wikiped), and without any translation, difficult undertand without EN mother tongue.
I understand that only real Author has to justify.
I am interested
in getting people to vote about this picture which was just removed from the sacrifice article, so am contacting everyone recent on my talk page. Please consider taking a few minutes, looking it over, and voicing an opinion. Thanks. Carptrash 03:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- thanks for your input. I'll stick by Oscar in any case. Carptrash 04:21, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- I'd didn't invite you over there to stack to vote but to get your POV. I have no problem with folks not agreeing with me, and this is certainly not a clear cut situation. I'm also sharing this other picture of a rock painting that was overlooking where I found the dog. Again, probably not wikiworthy, but, I found it interesting. Too bad it's not talking. Carptrash 18:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
That other photo is a wonderful bit of folk art!
- Yes, much like the sacrifice is folk-religion. I strongly suspect that it's the same folk involved in both.
Regarding Windsor Amrs
Hello, thanks for the help and info. I posted to your user page cause you posted on my page and not my talk page. Sorry It wasn't really professional though. I appreciate your help with this article, maybe you could contribute more as a veteran? I posted s reponse on the talk page, check it out.Payam81 17:27, 28 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the great work! Hope we can work on expansion in future. --Payam81 03:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Speedy Deletion
should the speedy deletion tag be removed from Stella Award
Yakatz 04:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Concerning, The Far*East Movement
I have full priviliges from: "www.fareastmovement.com", "www.myspace.com/fareastmovement", and "www.dopeusa.com" to use any of its contents on building their Wikipedia page. So please do not delete the page of Far*East Movement, and its Album "Folk Music"
FM - Folk Music
How come the webpage was deleted? I was going to put the information on there today so the admin. could have looked over and see if it was worth deleting. I did have a time period to put the information didn't I?
What else do I have to show you so that the band is notable? I've put the collaborations/whoever they have worked with. Some of them are the biggest names in the industry; Hi-Tek, and Jin, To name a few. I've also put where they have performed, 2 BIG world tours they have done. What else?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wickettaker (talk • contribs) 16:48, 31 January 2007 (UTC).
Office of Population Research
Thanks for clearing the Wherebot listing for me. (I didn't even know Wbot existed.) --Mereda 21:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
Allen Central High School
I trimmed the Allen Central High School article down to a stub, and removed the point-of-view text. I removed the {{prod}} as well. --Eastmain 01:19, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Deletion notice
First off I just want you to know that I did not create the materials which reside on the Character classes from the Dragon Quest series. I just copied it from List of character classes as that page is too unwieldy. Second, you may consider putting up List of character classes for deletion as it looks very similar to the site you pointed out. That is all. --The Dark Side 03:12, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Dr. Joachim Prinz
Thank youJuda S. Engelmayer 16:26, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Hansot copyvio / Imran Jamadar
Butseriouslyfolks, can you please check the changes that i have made in the present form?
And advise me of it. thanks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Imranjamadar/sandbox
Imranjamadar 16:02, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Extra Speedy Boxes on SharedXpertise - Shared Services and BPO Thought Leadership
Don't ya think that might have been a bit excessive? The article already had one Speedy box and a {{hangon}} on it. Talking to him on the talk page, it seems like he's interested in making it a good article. Also, it's likely that the text he quoted is infact his own, which wouldn't be a copy vio. I think seeing half a mile of speedy deletes on his article might scare away a potentially good editor. NipokNek 18:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar
 |
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
| I hereby award you this Working Man's Barnstar for all your work on keeping Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations empty. Thanks! Garion96 (talk) 21:36, 4 February 2007 (UTC) |
- You're welcome. The second time I give a barnstar to someone who annoys me because you always beat me to clearing up the copyvio's on that page. :) Garion96 (talk) 21:48, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
OK for deletion
OK, the Victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks may be deleted, as well as the discussion page for that. How did you know that this is from Fox News? Amos Han 03:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Since I realized that this Fox News things are copyrighted, how about deleting the page as soon as possible? Amos Han 03:12, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
Julia Lennon
The sources for the Stanley family were there in the text - Barry Miles and Bob Spitz books. How can can you call it voodoo? You put in that Grandpa was born in Everton - without an in-line citation. I will revert. andreasegde 18:27, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
- I took out the 'voodoo' Lord Stanley connection, as you may be right, but I will look for a firmer citation. andreasegde 18:50, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- I thank you kindly, and congratulate you for your in-line citation. Brilliant!andreasegde 20:18, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
GISAID
You incorrectly deleted my contribution, GISAID, claiming a similar article appeared to be a direct copy from http://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/hotnews/68h259343896799.html. That particualr text you are referring to, has been copied from an official press release http://gisaid.org/press_releases.html posted on GISAID's website. Please be more considered when thinking you must delete a page. Thank you Cherylbennett 09:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your clarification. I do not know how to reply to you directly, the way you have sent me your message. (I'm new to this forum) but please note that their has been no copy & paste whatsoever, and comments can be attributed to the members of GISAID that have been picked up not only in their own press release but by hundreds of articles out there. I have however made sure to comply with the guidelines you referred to earlier. Best! Cherylbennett 10:48, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
From our user page . . .
Thanks for the helpful messages about copyright issues, I will bear them in mind before I make any more edits. Best Regards, Wikimsd 14:43, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Centre for Rural and Northern Health Research
Actually, you are right, it is a multiple copyvio. I searched for "From 1992 to 1997, the research centre was known as the Northern" without quotes, with did not return anything, but when using quotes it delivers the page. To tag multiple urls, just add them to the template with "and", in example, {{db-copyvio|http://www.firstsite.com and http://www.secondsite.com}}. Thanks for the tip. -- ReyBrujo 04:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
Moët et Chandon
We could use your help on Moët et Chandon article. Someone removed a section arbitrarily but I've moved it to the discussion page (the correct way of removing a section I believe). It Needs some ref. work I believe and you're great at refs so if you had time check the article and discussion page to see if you could contribute anything. Many thanks! Payam81 14:44, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
Mike Rosen
I believe your removal of Mike Rosen was in error. The page Wherebot mistakenly thought was being copied [1] is actually quoting a previous version of the same Wikipedia page that did not have references. Fixerup 05:38, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Take A Look
User_talk:Billy_go_zoom#Okay. Billy go zoom 05:30, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
- I usually don't put things in two places, but I didn't have any idea if you'd watched my page or not. Billy go zoom 05:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Seminonparametric
I saw where my initial contribution was deleted owing to suspected copyright infringement. The work that was lifted into the article was, itself, released to GNU, and is covered by GNU's right to be freely distributed and copied to anyone on the planet with blood flowing through their veins. Nonetheless, I reworded the article as best I could, resubmitted and what not. So now, we ought to be ok - we've got a reworded GNU-protected article! ;-) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Burns wt (talk • contribs) 01:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC).
Ummmm - ok, now it is gone again, although all cut-n-pasted material was gone. Do you think you might be getting a little too zealous here, pal?
Re: United States v. Fordice
Thank you so very much for finding that error and I am quite sorry for the mistake! I had been multi-tasking and inadvertantly 'cut and pasted' that unreferenced statement rather than what I had intended to paste on that page. I will flesh out that article as soon as I find the article I had originally composed with proper citations. --MUW Fan 04:10, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi
Kindly, have you ever heard of fair use? frummer 20:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
From my talk
-
-
- Hi, I noticed you removed the db-bio template on this article. Are you suggesting that the article asserts sufficient notability or just that a school is not a proper subject for the "bio" tag? Thanks! -- Butseriouslyfolks 02:13, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
Sort of a mix of both. Schools are always a touchy subject to delete on wikipedia. The best bet is to take them to AfD. I didn't see any particular claims to notability there, other than those inherent in being a school, and I don't think a db-bio tag is necessarily the best one for the school. Just prod/afd it and it will likely be gone anyway in a few days, I just don't think the CSD process is appropriate for it. Cheers. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 02:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Just so you know, had I come across it, I wouldhave speedy deleted. I speedy delete nn schools, churches, etc. I am no respector of institutional bias. If its a vanity stub, it goes. :) KillerChihuahua?!? 15:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- That makes more sense to me, but I'm still relatively new here and learning the ropes. I wish somebody would figure out how to hammer out some consensus and make WP:SCHOOL into a proper guideline . . . Butseriouslyfolks 17:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- You and everyone who has tried for ... well, since Wikipedia began, almost. Its one of those contentious areas. No resolution in sight - but hey, if you can help with that, do so! KillerChihuahua?!? 21:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- Meh. Everytime I voted delete at AFD on a school, I got slammed by the "FOMG SCHOOLS ARE INHERENTLY NOTABLE" crowd, so I'm a bit apprehensive about speedying a school. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 03:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Keep me informed about your outside-the-box thing. I'm anxious to hear how it goes. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 07:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Meh. Everytime I voted delete at AFD on a school, I got slammed by the "FOMG SCHOOLS ARE INHERENTLY NOTABLE" crowd, so I'm a bit apprehensive about speedying a school. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 03:05, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
- You and everyone who has tried for ... well, since Wikipedia began, almost. Its one of those contentious areas. No resolution in sight - but hey, if you can help with that, do so! KillerChihuahua?!? 21:33, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- That makes more sense to me, but I'm still relatively new here and learning the ropes. I wish somebody would figure out how to hammer out some consensus and make WP:SCHOOL into a proper guideline . . . Butseriouslyfolks 17:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
- My...that is outside the box. So much so I think the point will be lost on the school inclusionists. "Just because there's a wiki for it doesn't mean it can't be here too!"⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 08:41, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
Lin-Wood High School
I would like to point out the three-revert rule official policy WP:3RR. I do not want to get into an edit war with you. When editing my edits; please discuss all future edits of Lin-Wood High School on the Lin-Wood High School talk page proir to making changes. Thank you --Masterpedia 04:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Hi, saw your comment on my talk page. I have no idea why you are bringing up the 3 revert rule. If you look at the article's history, you'll see that I have only made one edit to it since you started editing it. On the other hand, you have already reverted me two times.
It hardly seems fair to revert somebody and then insist that they essentially seek your permission before changing what you wrote. It is much more reasonable to practice what you preach and take it to a talk page before reverting them. You should not be contributing to WP unless you are willing to have your work edited by others.
You seem to want to limit the article to the high school grades of the school. However, the article deals with a public school housed in a single building that encompasses grades k through 12. The original contributor of the article obviously intended its scope to cover the whole school, as the first sentence was originally "Lin-Wood Public School is an accredited K-12 facility nestled in the White Mountains of New Hampshire." When you came to the article [2], it covered the whole school (aside from the title). I think if you want to limit the article to the high school section of the school building, you should take that to the talk page.
In the meantime, I am restoring the original scope of the article.
Cheers! Butseriouslyfolks 04:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- The reason I moved the discussion here is I can't stand when an editor says; CHEERS!. I do not allow that word on my talk page. Sorry. --Masterpedia 06:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Maria Lea Pedini-Angelini
You wrote...
Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Butseriouslyfolks 09:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I wrote...
I am a history and political buff currently researching European Microstates. I will be adding to this article in the near future. First off, this article is important because Pedini-Angelini was the first female head of San Marino (as well as one of the first women head of state in the world!) Secondly, there are dozens of wikipedia articles about Captains Regents of San Marino with much less information than my article. Thirdly, I have created at least thirty wikipedia articles, so give me the benifit of the doubt. I don't why my article has been singled out.
Seattledude 11:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Template:nothanks-sd
Thanks, I had the same problem. First explain that it is a copyvio, then you had to explain later about permissions. Now that template gives immediately all the info, much easier. What do you mean you don't get paid, I gave you a nice barnstar. :) Garion96 (talk) 13:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Wherebot down
Yikes! Thanks for telling me. I have started up Wherebot again.
Wherebot uses the RC feed, so it only detects new copyright violations (and it does not detect all partial copyvios). I am working on a supplemental bot to scan the WP database dump, but I keep on procrastinating work on it. I'll try to do some work on it this weekend.
Once again, thank you so very much for telling me about this! I probably wouldn't have noticed for weeks by myself. You are most kind. -- Where 14:09, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 16:28, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
copyright
In general, works publihed by a state or local government in their official capacity are also excluded from copyright. That would include, for example, the school board article. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 19:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Let me clarify a second. I know that it's not the same thing as publications by federal government which is protected by statute, but that's why I said not all, and "in general". It's highly likely that the webpage in question is not copyrighted due to it being a state government publication. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 19:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
copyright
I stand corrected on the state copyright thing. Thanks for dropping some science on me. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 09:16, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Business class
Take a look at this article, it is in really grave shape both in terms of references and general writing style! I think you will enjoy the challenge! --Payam81 23:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
H. Candace Gorman
You added a {{coi}} tag to the article. If you are referring to User:Frommeyer, as I am assuming from other tags you placed, you should be aware that I had already removed the contributions from that editor in their entirety before the tag was added.
Also, I question the removal of sourced content in your other edit there. Gorman's notability stems from her work in representing Guantanamo detainees (one in particular) and her public advocacy based on that representation. I believe the references removed in your deletion are valid sources about her and should be reinstated. The same goes for most of the text you removed. Please take another look and consider revising your actions. Thanks! Tim Shuba 00:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
replay to your message
this is a relay to your message about Mazaradi Fox. i did not copyt any text or images from his myspace site. i got them from a respected source 1. i just didnt have time to rewriting the content in my own words (as you recomended) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Peterm1991 (talk • contribs) 15:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC).
CFD/AFDs
What do you think about these articles in this category, for AFD? [3]?? ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 02:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Yep. I hate to AFD them because someone obviously worked hard at them, but they're just not notable. Anyway, I was pointing it out to you as I'm going on vacation for a week, no computer. If you don't get to it, no worries, I'll try and hit it when I get back. ⇒ SWATJester On Belay! 06:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Award
 |
The Exceptional Newcomer Award | |
| For an impressive start, making valuable contributions to an important area of Wikipedia despite having just active for just over a month. W.marsh 18:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC) |
Come to me if you have questions or need any help. And if you're interested, if you keep up the good work I would like to nominate you for adminship eventually, perhaps in May (4 months of experience is about the minimum needed). --W.marsh 18:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
Copyright question
Hi Butseriouslyfolks,
I saw on the Wikipedia:Suspected copyright violations history page that you work a lot with that page, so I'm hoping you know something about copyright or perhaps can point me to someone or some authority on Wikipedia who does. There's a deletion debate right now about 100 Greatest Albums of the 80s, a list put together by Rolling Stone that someone copied onto Wikipedia.
I'm absolutely certain (but absolutely NOT an expert) that copying a list violates no copyright, but I'll admit it's a bit fuzzy and arguments can be made on both sides. Apparently some other lists have also been deleted by editors worried about copyright violations. It seems to me that unless a case is clear, this is the type of thing that should be referred to lawyers or lawyer volunteers within Wikipedia. Editors without enough clear, strong guidance should be opting for using material and, after referring it to someone who actually knows about copyright law, should wash their hands of it. I'd appreciate any advice you may have about the whole thing and especially on where to go for advice. Thanks. Best, Noroton 00:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, I don't care which way you vote (I'm gonna lose this one anyway). I'm just hoping we can get further away from guesswork as to what the actual copyright status is. Glad you found it interesting. Noroton 01:40, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
If I may make a point on this because of past experience, the copyright is not the "text" that makes up the "list", but the use of the copyrighted "title" (i.e. text string). And then on how it is applied (motive). Example: "This is a list of great songs." vs. "You can buy this list of great songs from me". Both the movie and song industries have defined this in detail.
Arthur J Droge
You speedy deleted the Arthur J Droge article even if I had changed it. :( How come ? --Roberth Edberg 15:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
- Jepp, I left both a 'hangon' tag and comments on the talk page. Can I see somewhere who deleted it and reason? --Roberth Edberg 20:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
Just a little request
When you clear out a backlog list (like the copyright violations) - if the list is empty can you put EMPTY in big caps, it's the one time where it really helps just from a glance at the watchlist :) - Thanks -- Tawker 06:51, 9 March 2007 (UTC) Hi, Good day, how are you ?
Can i write up on wikipedia about our company UNITED EQUIPMENT COMPANY ??? Its a subsidury of SAQI BROTHERS - GROUP OF COMPANIES in Middle East & South Asia since 1994. UNITED EQUIPMENT CO. dealing in purchasing , selling, leasing and renting of brand new & used construction machinery include cranes, bulldozers, forklifts, excavators, loaders, graders, dump trucks all over the middle east and south asia since 1994 and have a good reputation in this regions. more over UNITED EQIPMENT CO. is only dealers of KOMATSU Co. ltd, Japan (worlds2nd largest manuf. of industrial and heavy equipment ) in Pakistan. UNITED EQUIPMENT CO., is a member of KARACHI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY AND DUBAI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY SINCE 1999. We have our Japan office in Tokyo. UNITED EQUIPMENT CO. have capital of JPY 200000000-/
SAQIB BROTHERS - group of companies is a karachi based official karachi custom agent since 1985 and agents of INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING LINE CO.,LTD , JAPAN AND TOKYO SHIPPING LINE CO., LTD, JAPAN. SAQIB BROTHERS, CEO former President of KARACHI CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY is also the vice president of DIST. GUJRAT city, Pakistan.
Kindly tell me what do you requirme more ?????????? i am manager of IT DEPARTMENT IN PAKISTAN.
Re: Wherebot
Darn. I had hoped I had fixed the downtime problem. Thank you for telling me.
Unfortunately, I will be away from my main computer for the next couple days and will be unable to log into the toolserver until I get back. But I will get Wherebot up again ASAP.
Thanks again, -- Where 23:29, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Mea Culpa
After cutting out the offending section, which I have removed to the Talk page, nothing currently remaining in the article is a copyvio. Please remove the speedy delete notice. Ta. -- Mais oui! 06:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Your NPWatcher Application
Dear Butseriouslyfolks,
Thank you for applying for NPWatcher! You've been approved to use it. Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if there is a newer release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Report any bugs or feature suggestion here. If you need help, feel free to contact me or join NPWatcher.
Martinp23 20:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Open Season (Stuck Mojo Song)
Please tell me where the lyrics to this song are released into the public domain. This should be noted on the article's talk page as well. Thank you. --Butseriouslyfolks 03:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Palestinian propaganda
I tried to find something in there that might conceivably evolve into a decent article, and I couldn't find anything. It was just too awful. Hesperian 05:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
McCarthy Trenching
Please see McCarthy Trenching's talk page for reasons why the article should not be speedy deleted. Thanks, Rockstar915 06:35, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'm with you on the band name! Thanks for understanding! Rockstar915 06:44, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Thanet District Council
Why do feel it necessary to come along and add cleanup tags to a page that was started just 7 minutes prior to your edit and is clearly in progress? It just succeeds in creating edit conflicts and putting off the person making an effort to do something constructive. Why not do something useful and clean it up yourself or just delete the page - you've put me off making further contributions. Pgr94 09:52, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- Do you think the cleanup can now be removed? If anything it warrants stub status. PS you'd be better off pigeon-holing new articles after a week. After 7 minutes it is much too early to make a judgement and you are only interrupting conscientious contributors. Pgr94 11:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Jewish opposition to evolution
Don't get silly. Please remove the "speedy deletion tag" from the article Jewish opposition to evolution. The page Judaism and evolution was becoming almost overwhelmingly a page for the discussion of incidents about, and the views of, a tiny and insignificant number of ultra-Orthodox rabbis. In addition, it was filling up with links to the papers of the Discovery Institute, which is a so-called think-tank supported by "intelligent design" proponents, a pseudo-science organization. What's more, the page had been tagged as part of a "creationism" series. I see that you are a new wikipedian, and a brand new administrator. Congratulations. Now stop wasting my time. This page is needed. And I don't want to waste my time with this page being on an "articles for deletion" list. You put it there. Now you remove it. --Metzenberg 10:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
- I think its perfectly obvious that it does not meet the speedy deletion criteria, and I appreciate that you (or somebody) fixed that mistake. Please give established wikipedia authors, those who have created many dozens of articles already, a few minutes to set up the page before you slap speedy deletion on the article. I have no time to spend on proposals for deletion. --Metzenberg 11:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Mississippi School Districts
I see that you have nominated three articles I started for deletion. One of them, Canton Public School District (Mississippi), was put up only one minute after it was created. The other two - Montgomery County School District and Winona Separate School District - were tagged for deletion only 6 and 10 minutes after being created. Having started articles on many school district's in Texas and having been in situations like this before [4], these articles are frequently expanded by others who have more knowledge of the school district than I do. As an experienced user, I agree with Metzenberg that you should wait more than a few minutes before you putting a new article up for deletion. You should have contacted me or added a tag (expand, notability, etc.) to the page before doing this. None of the school articles that I started and was later put up for deletion have ever been deleted, so if these three are then let it be. I will not spend my time or interrupt my contributions to Wikipedia by going through yet another deletion process. --Acntx 14:06, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Seema Luthra
An article that doesn't assert notability is one that says - for example - "Johnny is a brave seven year old who likes boogers". The Seema Luthra does assert notability by claiming this person is a candidate for the Indian Congress Party. This person may not be notable, per WP:BIO but the article is claiming notability. Therefore you should use WP:PROD or WP:AFD to propose its deletion, not the speedy deletion process. Gwernol 20:42, 14 March 2007 (UTC)
Reposting Articles
I didn't realize that the article I reposted had been deleted intentionally due to copyright issues. I was looking through a bunch of old wikipedia code and came across it. I then saw that the other books in the series had articles with red links pointing to the book. Just trying to be helpful. -Alataristarion 06:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
- No problem. Thanks for letting me know about it, and good work keeping an eye out for violations. -Alataristarion 06:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Professional bodies and Police articles
I removed the tag from the policing nvq, it has been altered, although it has been accessed by the LE user group (funny how they didn't bring any issues up with it).
Can you please let what businees threads you on about? I do tend not to take much notice of taggers (partly the fault of someone called kinslayer, we can do without his abusive rubbish - he deleted something I wa sworking on at the time! which was orginal not copied).
Seriously i thinking this tagging business has to be looked at, if you don't contribute to that subject area then really you shouldn't be tagging there. If you have an issue bring it up first with person responsible.--Pandaplodder 17:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
Copyvios/NPW
Thanks for being more specific on the copyvio tagging. It always seemed to randomly fail when I used it and knowing the reason is a great help obviously! --Steve (Stephen) talk 23:28, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
HELP
thanks for editing my images (inncorrect tags) but how can i keep the images on wikipedia if i just found it online? -JUND
THANK YOU! -jund
thanks
thanks for the comment and for the support. also just so you know I was not trying to sway the vote. --MJHankel 03:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
 |
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
| For your support, and for your unwavering stance on policy MJHankel 03:54, 18 March 2007 (UTC) |
well
the way I see it from all that I see that you do from your other talk info and contributions, this star is probably long over due.--MJHankel 04:00, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, and thank you for quoting me. MJHankel 04:02, 18 March 2007
-
- thanks again --MJHankel 06:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: SProtecting Templates
Don't worry. I've asked Tregoweth to protect the templates. Still waiting for a reply... --AAA! (AAAA) 02:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Smile!
Saber girl08 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Saber girl08 04:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Re: National Diamond
sorry about the copyright mix-up earlier. you can check the latest version of the page here : National Diamond. All copyright references have ben removed Q 14:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Sesquicentennial Exposition
What a wonderful addition to this article! --Butseriouslyfolks 20:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
- Glad you like it...thanks for the kind words. Centpacrr 03:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
British School of Osteopathy
I've tried to rewrite the entry, but I'd thought I'd point out that copying one or two lines isn't a copyright violation. If it was it would be impossible to write an encyclopedic entry on most things, because it would violate the copyright of the encyclopedically written definitions in other encyclopedias. As a rule of thumb, you should look out out for entries that copy more than about 3 lines and entries that could be reworded without affecting its quality. - Mgm|(talk) 13:06, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
Common Assessment Framework
The definition used on my CAF contribution comes from European Institution for Public Administration's (EIPA) Brochure - 2006 and as mentioned there : "The CAF is in public domain and free of charge. Organizations are free to use the model as they wish." It was put for further expansion from experts Thpanagos 07:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Common Assessment Framework -II
The body responsible for CAF is EIPA. The site you mentioned only reproduce EIPA material in Slovakia. The Legal Notice at EIPA states: Copyright notice © European Institute of Public Administration, 2000-2005 Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. Where prior permission must be obtained for the reproduction or use of textual and multimedia information (sound, images, software, etc.) such permission shall cancel the abovementioned general permission and clearly indicate any restrictions on use.
You can blame me for not mentioned the source.
The Common Assessment Framework page in wiki was created by me again, after your delete.Thpanagos 11:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
Please take another look
Hi Butseriouslyfolks,
I don't think I explained myself well enough in my first comments about changing my vote at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/East Middle School, and I've added what I think is a clearer explanation. You make a good point about an editor's behavior not affecting a vote, but I think the behavior is on the border of disruptive. I'd be interested in what you think, either in the discussion or on my talk page or yours. Thanks for your contributions to the discussions so far. Noroton 05:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Let me introduce myself
Geo Swan, two and a half years on the wikipedi. Something like 15,000 edits under my belt. My first year most of my contributions were in non-controbersial areas, like nautical history. Most of my contributions over the last year and a half have been in articles that are related, in some way, to the "global war on terror".
I do my best to make my contribution in full compliance with wp:npov, wp:rs, wp:or. I don't expect to succeed 100% of the time, so I try to make an effort to give every challenge to my contributions a serious, civil effort to engage in a dialog. I think I must be doing an OK job, because, for 10,000 edits I get very few challenges. And sometimes I get people who share the POV I hold priavtely question whether I am a POV-pusher from the other side.
Which brings us to...
Your big excision from the H. Candace Gorman article
You made a big excision from the H. Candace Gorman article, primarily excising a huge block of material. I contributed the material you excised. I contributed it, in good faith. It represented a significant effort.
I am giving you a heads-up that have concerns that your excision did not improve the overall value of the wikipedia, rather, the reverse.
I am hoping you will return to Talk:H. Candace Gorman, and we can try to reach a meeting of minds.
Cheers! — Geo Swan 18:38, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Politics.ie
The National Party of Northern Ireland article was written by me on that site I also posted it here.--padraig3uk 20:21, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for clearing that up.--padraig3uk 20:28, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
Curtin University of Technology Sarawak Campus
Please see my comments on the above talk page, since you tagged the page, you should have input. Also, do you have something against this page? I only ask because you've put in two CSD Requests. Cheers, Jonomacdrones (talk) 09:46, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
Mimi Smith
Thanks a lot - very well spotted indeed! andreasegde 23:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Henry Barnett (MP)
I have followed procedure sending the appropriate email to permissions@ Please WP:AGF. - Kittybrewster (talk) 20:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've rewritten it to avoid copyvio. (PS please use colons to indent on talk pages, not bullets, per WP:TPG.) Tyrenius 21:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Nicolas Bacri
Sorry I did not know that I was not to remove speedy deletion tags from articles that you have created yourself, as I did with Nicolas Bacri. As you can see the article has been edited. I was in the middle of editing this as well as other pages. (which you have already deleted!) How can one correct the page if it is already deleted? If this is the way this Wikipedia works then I shall not contribute any further. Please give the chance to edit any pages before deleting.Swanstone 23:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
non-free content
Oops, thx for correcting my boo boo. Tony 12:50, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Copyright
Hi Butseriouslyfolks-I am the author of the original website page and also of the Wikipedia entry, "Womens Organization for National Prohibition Refrm." Therefore, there is no copyright violation.
Perhaps you could help me with another matter. The correct kname of the organization was Women's Organization for National Prohibition Reform. However, when I created the entry, I accidentally titled it without the apostrophe but have been unable to correct my mistake. Many thanks for any help you can provide.David Justin 14:53, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
about use permission
May I remove {{copyvio}} from Ian F. Akyildiz? I was granted permission under GFDL, and I have submitted it to OTRS.
Rjgodoy 15:48, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Image:Antennaegalaxies.jpg listed for deletion
Thanks for the notice, the file got orphaned due to a copy subsequently being created on commons. I have updated the commons version to be the full resolution version we had here, so it is fine to delete it now. WilliamKF 17:59, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
Catanich (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log)
I've blocked this user for WP:COI given the User:MyWikiBiz precedent. Thanks for your help. --Shirahadasha 05:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
La Nature
The French version indeed is more or less a direct copy from the website you identified, something I did not really notice. The English version, however, has some other elements, and I believe it is still salvageable if I find some other sources and use appropriate citations. Is this permissible? --Oreo Priest 03:02, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- On that note, I'm slightly curious as to how you managed to find a cross-language copyvio so quickly. --Oreo Priest 03:03, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, so it seems the similarity is due to the fact that the author of that website is also the author of the French Wikipedia article (i.e. Gloubik). I don't know if you understand French but here are my clues. [6] [7] and of course the link at the bottom of the userpage to the offending website as "my webpage". Thus I formally ask that your remove the copyvio tag, and I can send Gloubik a message in French if you wish. --Oreo Priest
- Is there anything I should mention for Gloubik to do in order to avoid this problem in the future? Or should I just let it be? --Oreo Priest 03:31, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
Image:PICT0092.JPG
Why is this image listed for deletion?
Norum 04:18, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, no problem. To be honest, i forgot that I uploaded it twice.
Norum 06:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
Sorry I don't have a song with this!
Trampton has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Trampton 06:11, 27 April 2007 (UTC).
Image:Dhakaradisson22.jpg
The image has been created by the Bangladeshi members of the skyscrapercity forums and intened for use by anyone if you need written permission of the auther please inform (Comment deleted by user and reposted by Butseriouslyfolks 20:34, 29 April 2007 (UTC))
thank you, i wasnt aware of that fact, most of the pictures that i have posted are of bangladesh and which have been created by the skyscrapercity bangladeshi members and arent subject to copyright then again if you do need evidence please let me know i shall be gald to provide you with some.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Dopekhor (talk • contribs)
Wayne Memorial Hospital (Pennsylvania)
Please restore Wayne Memorial Hospital (Pennsylvania) check its Talk page for reasoning Well if you read the page you'd realize that i was not being biased in any manner, further more I only stated facts (How many beds, How old it is).
"If you feel the need to add content to Wikipedia articles despite a real or perceived conflict of interest, we strongly encourage you to submit that content for review on the article's talk page or file a request for comment. Let trusted community members judge whether the material belongs in Wikipedia" --Please allow me to recreate the page and then you judge it. I'm only trying to benefit the community that is Wikipedia by increasing its encyclopedic content. FCBAYERNMUNCHEN 00:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, I redid the page and put things in my own words, which is hard to with brief factual info, but at least its no longer copied from the site.
Image:PICT0012a.jpg
Can you tell me what imagine was it? I mean what article was it in?
Norum 22:01, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
Please use the tildes so others can click on your name to find you. Thanks
I do. Which article are you reffering to?
Norum 04:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
I think I got it figured it out. One little box in the preferences that I should have left unchecked.
Norum 05:56, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
well, it's May
I said I'd nominate you for adminship in May, and it's May, so if you're still interested, I'd still be willing to do it. You really just have 3 1/2 months of active experience, but it's exceptionally active, and in areas where you'll clearly have use for admin tools. But I think you'd have a strong chance now. So let me know what you think... if you feel like you'd be more productive now with the tools there's no harm in applying sooner rather than later. --W.marsh 00:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
I get really annoyed
with people who are deleting my content. Yes phrases of sentences might come fromw websites, but it doesn't mean that that is copyvio. It seems you haven't created any content apart from stuff about a wrestler who wanted to be president Dirknachbar 14:34, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Bojidara Kouzmanova
If I am reading it correctly, the articlewhich has been copied into wikipedia contains at its foot a statement to the effect that usage of the text is permitted. Would you care to check?--Anthony.bradbury 22:38, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
Ivailo Djourov
Now deleted as you suggested; but please take a look at User talk:Thracia#Ivailo Djourov. -- Hoary 00:36, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your input. Do you have any additional links, or thoughts about issues where you personally were involved? Eusebeus 21:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well as you can see from my exchange with him on my talk page, there seems to be little room for a conciliation in tone, and from the recent AfD discussion (just a rehash of the schools debate), little room for tolerance of those who disagree - masked, of course, through supposed recourse to policy. I think an RfC that aims to control his actions at AfD may be appropriate since this sort of engagement is, in my view at least, generally contrary to the consensus-building spirit that makes Wikipedia work. If you are interested in being part of such an effort, do let me know since it should be as broad as possible. Eusebeus 22:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
- I would in no way consider your actions (or mine, for that matter) wikistalking, given the problems outlined. Wikipedia depends on good faith interactions to work. Editors who cannot abide by those principles do much harm, whatever else they do. Eusebeus 22:29, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I only make personal attacks it would appear, so my participation must be anathema! Eusebeus 22:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
- I would in no way consider your actions (or mine, for that matter) wikistalking, given the problems outlined. Wikipedia depends on good faith interactions to work. Editors who cannot abide by those principles do much harm, whatever else they do. Eusebeus 22:29, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
A thank you
Thanks for all of your hard work dealing with User:Paulapatty. I have been working through her image contributions, and have posted a final warning to her Talk page that if she uploads any more images in violation of our image use policy, I will block her. I will try to watch her contributions but if you see something that I miss please give me a heads-up. Thanks --Spike Wilbury 18:39, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
user:71.252.185.90 and user:catanich
Hi! We seem to have a possible sockpuppet of the indefinitely blocked user:catanich. I'm fine with a little bit of grousing about the block, but perhaps this user should be watched to make sure he/she/it doesn't continue in Catanich's footsteps --Shirahadasha 02:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Shirahadasha, why are you unwilling to discuss this with me? Or if you wish please contact me Jim Catanich email catanich@airmail.net You may find that you are in error.
Your Position On Copyright Violations
Hi Butseriouslyfolks
Your position on CopyVios does not help the contributor learn what is needed, but is interpreted by them as overreaction. This create ill will for Wiki and brings up a "catch-22" the Editor community must face. Are you over reacting?
As someone who has been blocked by you for copyvios, I found this to be very confusing as a beginner. First, I was authorized to use "any and all content" by the copyright holders. This fact removes your grounds for the copyvios being applied. I can understand what the editor must go thru, but to the beginner, the process of submitting a Copyright permission form (?) to use the copyright content is not readily findable or just not communicated by you or the Wiki environment.
It should be noted that if someone is a Public Relation (type of) firm, they have a copyright release in their contracts with the copyright holder. Therefore, to block someone as a PR firm and then block them for Copyvios is a contraction.
But with the aggressiveness of the blocks and the Wiki default message(s) presented, the first impression is overwhelming for the beginner and more harmful; the copyright holder. When Wiki issues a Copyvios block, the Editor is accusing the contributor of violating US Copyright Laws and therefore this will have a major impact on that contributor. If this was just left within the privacy of the contributor’s talk section that would not be indexed by the Search Engines (SE), this would be one thing, but it is not. It is public and available to the SEs to be indexed. This makes PUBLIC your accusing the contributor of violating US Copyright Laws. It is index able by Google and therefore extremely harmful to contributor especially when the facts do no support your actions or positions.
A classic example of this is what has happened to me, user:catanich. I was called a PR firm. But this was not the fact. This article(s) had nothing to do with my web site/company or my professional assign duties.
I was also at the same time accused of copyright violations. Again not factual. But before I could learn how to submit the permission that were requested by you to address each of these Copyvios within the Wiki framework, I was block from doing so.
Now, I am attempting to defend my self to the your public statements about Copyright Violations and associate actions by searching for Wiki info that has been indexed by Google. Yes, I know this will become interpreted as a nuisance to you and resulting in negative action. But if the Wiki editor community would look at the real facts behind this, they would find that you have over reacted to the lack of Wiki knowledge of a beginner.
Please understand my standpoint, there are no easy ways to address this type of issue in a timely manner. The appeal process is difficult to locate and takes time to navigate. But your unjust accusations were instantaneous and very damaging. Please understand, you have been involved with Wiki for a long time and the policies are second nature to you, but for the beginner, it is an extensive learning curve. Your actions were applied after my first day of editing. Would you please contact me about this.
Thank you Jim Catanich catanich@airmail.net
71.252.185.90 14:50, 26 May 2007 (UTC) user:catanich
- Hi, I'm replying here as you are editing anonymously. I must take issue with your assertion that the tags I applied to the articles you posted were inappropriate. If you will review the template {{db-copyvio}}, you will see that it states that the article was copied with no assertion of permission. Posting articles that way (i.e., copied without asserting permission) is a clear violation of WP's policy, even if you have permission. (I should note that having permission to use somebody else's text is not the same as having permission to post it to WP, where it has to be licensed under the GFDL.) Also, it is unfair for you to suggest that WP's copyright policies fail to provide guidance to new editors, as the warnings left on your user page clearly explained the procedure for confirming copyright permission.
- In addition to copyright issues, you have significantly misrepresented the facts of the matter. First, I did not ban you. I am not an administrator, so I don't have that power. Second, you were not banned for copyright infringements. You were banned for posting articles on behalf of paying clients, which is also a clear violation of WP's policies. Third, you were not banned after your first day of editing. Your account was created six weeks earlier. Fourth, you cannot have been ignorant of WP's policies against advertising and promotion, because you managed to get yourself warned for just that a mere 14 minutes after your account was created.
- In any event, all users of Wikipedia are required to comply with its policies. If you decide to post articles before familiarizing yourself with these policies, you assume the risk of unknowingly violating the policies and being banned. There are a number of policies, but it's not exactly rocket science. The very fact that WP is an encyclopedia should have clued you in on the fact that it would be inappropriate to post articles about paying clients here. --Butseriouslyfolks 21:37, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Book cover
I have already summarized this. It's very clear that it's a book cover. The editor is a novice and used the wrong tag. Rather than substitute the correct tag, you chose to teach him/her a lesson. There's no problem with this book cover, with the proper tag. Badagnani 07:16, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Copyright vio
You are not correct. United Noachide Council, Inc. This information is also available http://en.wikinoah.org/index.php/UNC where it says "the text contained in Wikinoah is licensed to the public under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL)" http://en.wikinoah.org/index.php/English_Wikinoah:Copyrights I hope this is not a "bad mark" on my record. --Ibn nuh 05:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC) --Ibn nuh 07:41, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
- Why did you delete the text after I explained the source was copied from a GFDL source. I used material from that website relying on its GFDL. The text I used is different from the text that you suggest, (I did not even know about it). Are you suggesting that my source is in copyright violation? On what basis do you have to say that?!? bnainoachnews.com and wikinoah.org are run by the same organization! --Ibn nuh 09:06, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Comment. Please explain yourself. The above two links above CLEARLY have GFDL. The text you said it was copied is two paragraphs shorter than the GFDL source I used!!!! You really have spoiled the wikipedia experience for me. goodbye. --Ibn nuh 07:46, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
-
Note that after complaining that his links "CLEARLY" had GFDL, he changed one of those links here, so apparently it wasn't so CLEAR. --Butseriouslyfolks 07:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- It was ALWAYS clear. The link was only because wikipedia was DROPPING THE TRAILING PERIOD. Shortly after I realized that I used the alternative like everywhere including the AfD where I said "please read this". --Ibn nuh 08:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- How do you know that it was the original website? The link you post is also a forum where anyone could post. That link was posted by a the director "Billy Jack Dial" on April 2006. The text I used was posted in September 2006 with different wording, and longer text also edited by "Billy Jack Dial"! You messed up and don't want to apologize. You did not act in the wikipedia tradition of good faith. So be it. --Ibn nuh 08:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- It is doubtful that an someone would log into a site belonging to the same organization, which requires registration and approval, and impersonate their director. To what extent does wikipedia have to police other sites copyright?? Besides now that I look at your link, I see that there appears to be NO COPYRIGHT on the bnainoachnews.com website. What you are saying is that wikimedia documents which purport a GDFL are less valid than a FORUM which appears to have no copyright. But even all this, I specifically wrote "hangon, I have asked the author to confirm this information", and still I get abused by both you and Calton. You made a mistake and won't appologize. --Ibn nuh 09:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- You have misunderstood what I have written. Enough said. You have turned this into a personal issue. None of the six people commenting on this page are insisting that there is a copyright problem here, except you.
- If there were a negative barnstar, I would award you with that. Please no more comments on my talk page. --Ibn nuh 19:00, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
-
- Stop playing around with my talk page. please. Comment if you wish, but not deleting text or moving things around and wholesale reverts. Enough already. The history is there for anyone who is interested. Including your comments which you have deleted from this page. --Ibn nuh 21:21, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- End of the story. The page I submitted will probably be deleted due to lack of notability, which although I think it is similar to other existing pages and significant, is ok with me. In the end it was authorized by the author. If you wanted fax or written letter that could be provided too. But it is not relevant now. I walk away with the understanding that if a website has the name "wiki" in it, even if it is a corporate website, even if unlike wikipedia it requires approval and authorization before editing, even if we are talking about a press release which was designed to be distributed, and it has a declared GFDL - all that is meaningless to your interpretation of copyright law. This appears to be a case uneven application of policy, where over-zeolousness enforcement in some wikipages is done to make up for a lack of enforcement in other pages.
-
-
-
- Also please understand about the wikipedia software bug: dropping trailing periods. If an external link ends with a period, that period will not be included in the link. For example this link that the period is not underlined http://anywhere.com/link_that_drops_its_period. <- note the period is not included. If wikipedia did the right thing an encode the page as http://anywhere.com/link_that_drops_its_period%2E (where I write "%2E" instead of "." it works. I hope that wikipedia policy and software will grow over time, this is too much aggravation for me. --Ibn nuh 07:02, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
-
Chartered Society of Physiotherapy
You have removed paragraphs that I wrote myself (from my own PhD), in which I have cited other authors where necessary. This is in no way a copyright violation. Furthermore, in removing large chunks of writing has made what remains a mish-mash of sentences, with no chronological order or context. Your definition of the CSP is now also incorrect, inasmuch as it fails to address some fundamental features of the Society's work and scope. As you clearly do not know very much about the subject, I would recommend that you discuss these issues before you hit the delete button so freely Davwillev 12:18, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
"Hi, you need to confirm your ownership of the copyright to that text by following the procedure above. Then all will be fine. The material has to stay off until permission is confirmed. Thanks. --Butseriouslyfolks 17:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)"
There is no text remaining from the original flagging for copyright infringement yet you persist with your il-informed view that there is an infringement. Read the website of the CSP if you don't believe me. There is no copying of text whatsoever. Therefore, I cannot get any permission to reproduce what hasn't been copied. Also you are trying to remove large chunks of text from the section titled 'history' (tantamount to vandalism in my opinion). Respect the contributions of others before wielding your ill-informed overzealous editing. I have emailed WP in any case. DO NOT revert my changes again until both of us have heard back from this. Davwillev Davwillev 20:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I have asked the administrator that deleted this page to revert the page back to my last edit. Unfortunately, he/she hasn't got back to me so can you help? Thanks Davwillev 19:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Image:Giant Manta
Hi, and thanks for tagging Image:Giant Manta.JPG and stating that "this image was uploaded under a fair use rationale, but may fail Wikipedia's first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a free image might reasonably be found or created that adequately provides the same information". However, the image was not uploaded under a fair use rationale; it was uploaded (by me, as it happens) as a public domain image ineligible for copyright.
You have added to that tag one that gives false information, threatens the image with deletion within a week and at the same time must not be removed ("Do not remove this tag."). You have not notified the uploader (me again) ("After adding this tag, please notify the uploader").
What am I supposed to do? I'm not so good at drawing, maybe you could draw a giant manta? All the best, <KF> 22:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Visit an aquarium? The whole point of the image is to illustrate the story/legend, not to show what a giant manta really looks like. It took me some time to find what I thought was the right tag—Template:PD suggested "ineligible" for "trivial work", and that's what I used.
- I've seen so many book covers tagged for deletion recently that I (wisely, I thought) refrained from uploading one for The Black Pearl. I've also taken the trouble to ask for permission to use images in Wikipedia, and got the permission, only to see the image deleted nevertheless because the author did not want it to be used commercially. (So I'm not going to ask Rebekah for permission—not even sure if it is her drawing.) If people (a) don't want illustrations on Wikipedia and (b) can't draw themselves either, okay, do what you think has to be done. I give up. Best wishes, <KF> 23:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
€urogib Virtual
what the f### is it you got against my virtual airline, my authorship of logos and images!
I had my wiki taken down by an anonymous person via bot i trust that was you too!
--Cm tony 12:37, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Fair use
The images you mention on my talk page have been uploaded when fair use requirements were different, the concept of replaceable fair use was rather moot, there were no alternative images in Commons, and at least one of them was uploaded under Template:PD-Soviet which was a perfectly valid license at the time. If you feel they may be dangerous for Wikipedia (which I don't), feel free to delete them. --Ghirla-трёп- 04:51, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
WP:SCV
No problem, I only wish I had found that page sooner. I can usually spot a copyvio pretty quickly. That page makes it even easier to find and tag. Also, do you know what Wikipedia's policies surrounding the use of creative commons work (for text) is. I know certain CC licenses are good for images, but one author of a page I tagged said he is the webmaster and is working on adding CC permission on the page the article is copied from. Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 02:54, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
drive-by tagging
G'day Butseriouslyfolks,
thanks for your message. I'd like to reassure you that you can sleep safely in your bed, knowing that I am indeed au fait with our copyright policy and the reasons behind it. My edit summary was indeed a bit short, and for largely the same reasons that people tag worthwhile articles instead of improving them — lack of time, and getting jaded after seeing the problem occur so often.
I didn't intend to offend you (neither do I intend to thank you, any more than you should thank me, but it's nice to keep the dream alive). I see a lot of articles tagged inappropriately (I untag more articles than I delete, these days, which shows you the extent of the problem), and that makes me curter than I should be with those who tag articles for speedy deletion — even when the tagging wasn't itself inappropriate, but merely not the best option. Can we call this a "we both learnt something today" moment? Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 08:06, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Zykina
I think the key here is to be reasonable. Let's work out the issues here:
The photo was taken in, let us say, 1965. Thus, reasonably speaking, the photographer is either dead or at least in his late 60s, living in a Soviet-era apartment, and has no idea this image is being used. Thus, even if he had grounds to sue, he realistically won't.
Madame Zykina is almost 78 and retired. She probably looks nothing like she did in her prime -- and remember, the work that really made her notable had all taken place by, let us say, the late 1980s.
Which takes us to the Wikipedia policy guideline -- guideline -- that disallows fair use for "An image of a living person that merely shows what s/he looks like. The rationale is that this is potentially replaceable with a freshly produced free photograph."
Now, that's a perfectly sensible position with which I have no problem in many cases. However, there are exceptions. We do need fair-use images for Kim Jong Il: I doubt he'd allow you or me the chance to snap a picture. We have a couple of free images of Roger Ebert that he was kind enough to provide himself, but given that he basically has no jaw now, I think users would be better served by fair use images of the earlier Ebert, if we didn't have the current images. With Zykina, again: do users want to see a little old lady in who knows what condition, or are they better served by seeing a radiant soloist in her prime? On balance, and considering all the issues involved, I think the rationale is solid enough. Biruitorul 06:51, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
-
- I believe the concept holds water, at least for retired performers. One can say that, as long as Igor Moiseyev is alive, the images of him dancing at the Bolshoi are replaceable. On the other hand, he is notable for dancing rather than for living to an extremely old age. The image is expected to represent what makes the person notable, rather than providing a casual, blurry mugshot of his current condition. (Just in case you reach the letter M...) --Ghirla-трёп- 13:33, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
COI Templates.
Hi, I'm sending you a message because of your involvement with the Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2007_May_18#Template:COI_and_Template:COI2 discussion. The result of the TfD was no-consensus, but there was a significant expressed consensus for editing the templates to bring them into line with good practice. Unfortunately this has not happened, and the templates have been left pretty much in the state they were before the TfD. Would you like to assist in bringing these templates in line with good practice? --Barberio 16:47, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
To Encounter Christ
I cannot see anywhere on either quoted page any assertion of copyright, without which there can be no infringement. Most Catholic documents are freely available. I have removed your speedy tag, but will be most happy to proceed with deletion if you can show me a copyright violation.--Anthony.bradbury 22:49, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi-Zack (Mobile suit)
Jeffpiatt reposted the Hi-Zack article yet again after it has been speedily deleted twice. I added a tag to note that it may still be a candidate for such deletion. Please let me know if I was out of line in doing so. Maikeru 23:28, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
To Encounter Christ
Hi there; your message to me appears to imply that i personally have added copyrighted material to the encyclopedia. You may have phrased it badly, I may have misunderstood, or you may have posted to the wrong user. This is not my article, i did not post it, and the discussion was about whether it was covered under copyright law, which I was actually not arguing about.--Anthony.bradbury 00:02, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
- Noted. No-body is perfect.--Anthony.bradbury 00:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Looking around
Thank you; most kind. --Anthony.bradbury 01:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Comment required
Hi there, as a fellow contributor to Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images I was wondering if you'd take the time to comment on the proposal I've made on the talk page at Wikipedia talk:Possibly unfree images#Proposal for an addition to the page introduction. Thanks. Madmedea 19:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Copyright for Zurab Zviadauri's image
Hi, I would like to let you know that I obtained the license for all the images by Paata[[8]] on Flickr thought email where he agrees to realease them under CC BY SA 2.0 and I have been uploading them on commons as well. Would you like me to forward you the message? SosoMK 16:56, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- For some weird reason, he has got it marked as All Rights Reserved[[9]] for that specific picture but he has told me that I can use any of his pictures on Flickr as CC BY CA 2.0, so I guess I will just send the message and if that's still problem I will ask him to change the license on the page. Thanks, SosoMK 17:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, would you mind taking a look a this discussion and voting for the economy section of Georgia (country). There are some users who don't like pro-EU portrayal of the Georgian economy and I have been blocked for 3RR rule while warring with them and I think that votingtalk:Georgia (country) would be the best thing. Cheers, SosoMK 17:37, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
Hi
- sigh* Well, if you don't mind, add the relevant diffs to the list on my talk page and if it gets too intolerable, we can think again about proceeding with an RFC. It may be worth alerting other entangled editors in these exchanges in the event they have thoughts or views on the subject. Eusebeus 10:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding that. I might note that, while he is far too convinced of his own rectitude and editorial probity to admit any transgression, the act of collecting this evidence seems to be having a salutary effect. Whilst I have not bothered looking through recent edits, his interactions in the AfD arguments I have seen are rather more tempered, as if he has become vaguely aware that his comments are too often unacceptable, disruptive, puerile and self-defeatingly obstreperous. Instances, like the one you linked on my page, make it clear that the underlying impulse to bully and accuse remains a serious problem and one worth monitoring. I am hopeful, however, that an RfC will be unnecessary if this overall trend towards better behaviour continues. Eusebeus 15:08, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- BSF, Have you seen the latest derangement at the Schoolcruft talk page, his own cruftcruft (!) screed and now the blown gasket at AN/I? Eusebeus 13:17, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
Council House Fight
Respectfully, anther editor removed your tag on the Council House Fight as it certainly did not enfringe the copyright. I tweaked some wording anyway, and removed the tag on my page, as I did not consider it a violation either. Nonetheless, to be sure, I did, as I noted, tweak the page though I do not believe any sentence was wholley transferred. (wording is sure to be alike on historical events, but none were the same) I was also very careful to attribute sourcing. old windy bear 10:06, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Request to reconsider your opinion on deletion of Clayton Middle/High School
Hi, Since your vote in favor of deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clayton Middle/High School, I added information from three news articles about the school which establishes notability under Wikipedia standards. Please take a look at the revised Clayton Middle/High School article and reconsider your vote. I think my additions very specifically meet your objections as per WP:N. Thanks! Noroton 16:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the star!
That's really darned nice of you, thanks for the Barnstar. BTW, I too am counting the microseconds until Futurama starts airing again. Good news, everyone! ;) Groupthink 23:04, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
Clarification requested
Greetings. I've been going through the IFD backlog, deleting and processing images that have been listed for deletion. At Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion/2007 May 27, you listed many images uploaded by User:Arvindvenkat as falsely licensed and unfree. However, I'm having trouble understanding why you think they are incorrectly licensed. You say "Uploader claims to be creator but also claims to be in the photo", but I can't find anywhere where the uploader claims to be either the photographer or in the photo. I'll certainly delete them if it looks like they are falsely licensed, but I was hoping you could clarify for me. All the best, – Quadell (talk) (random) 13:44, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
Please reconsider your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alton C. Crews Middle School in light of changes
Hi,
A large number of improvements have been made to the Alton C. Crews Middle School article since you voted. Please take another look and reconsider. Thanks! And thanks for reconsidering in that last deletion discussion, too. Great minds don't necessarily think alike, but they're open! Noroton 18:40, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
I posted this at the deletion discussion just below your comment:
-
-
- From your commment just above it's impossible for me to figure out what additional citation about the award would satisfy you. There's a news brief from the Atlanta Constitution which certainly proves the award's existence, but the already cited news release from Intel itself about the award it sponsors is certainly independent and reliable in and of itself, or do you dispute that? The award was made in conjunction with Scholastic, another sponsor. I skipped Scholastic's news release because it didn't seem to add anything to it. I get the impression when you talk about notability that you're shifting back and forth from WP:N, which has a Wikipedia-specific definition relying on multiple, reliable, independent sources and a vaguer notion of "importance and fame". If we have two independent, reliable sources we have notability under WP:N, correct? Please clarify. Noroton 19:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
-
Here's what you wrote me, and my response:
- I'm relying on WP:N notability, not a concept of fame or noteworthiness. All I saw in the award article was one independent article about the award. (I'm disregarding the self-generated Intel and Scholastic press releases for notability purposes, as they are not independent.) So I don't see the award as notable, and therefore winning it would not per se confer notability upon a school.
-
- Response: The award doesn't have to be notable. The school, as the subject of the article, has to be notable. The source of the information (Intel/Scholastic/their foundation) is independent of the subject of the article, which is what "independent" means in the context of WP:N, as is explicitly stated there.
-
Turning to the school, we have one newspaper article about a teacher that may or may not constitue significant coverage of the school, and the press release about the maybe notable, maybe nonnotable award, which is I suppose independent of the school but not independent of the awarder, which is affiliated with the school by virtue of the award. Taken together, I don't see that as "significant coverage in reliable sources [plural] that are independent of the subject", as required by WP:N. I hope you understand my thinking, even if you may not agree with it. Take care! --Butseriouslyfolks 20:25, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
-
-
- Well, I added information from the Gwinnett Daily Post, the local daily newspaper down there, from an article about what the school did with the $200,000-plus in prizes it won from that award. And if you want, I can add the briefs from the Atlanta Constitution and Gwinnett Daily Post on the actual winning of the award. In addition, we have the Georgia state report card on the school, which constitutes significant, reliable, independent coverage. Frankly, if some foundation set up by Intel and Scholastic sets out to give away money across the country and settles on a particular school, it seems to me they're a pretty reliable source about the money they've given out and why. What criteria would that press release fail to meet? Noroton 21:44, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
-
Janice Vidal
You removed images from the article Janice Vidal in this edit. I don't disagree with some of the image removals, but you removed images from the Discography section. I think those images are fine - see {{Non-free album cover}}. They were used to illustrate the musical work in question. Sure, the images are without fair-use rationale, but that can be fixed easily. enochlau (talk) 22:05, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- Personally, I'd consider that particular case to be borderline as to whether it adds any information or whether it's merely a list, but whatever, up to you. enochlau (talk) 22:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
- I believe as long as the photo was released as a promotional photo, the source is attributed and rationale is given as to why it qualifies under fair use even though a person is living, then it is OK. As an example, take a look at the photos in the articles in this category - Category:Japanese porn stars. So we just need to find promotional photos instead of album covers. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 22:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
So when is it OK to use promotional images per this tag - Template:Non-free promotional? Do you think you can give an example? These copyright issues can be frustrating when you're trying to enhance an article with some pictures. (Just reply here so we can keep the discussion in one place.) Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 03:46, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that copyright issues can be frustrating. I think this is the most complicated area of Wikipedia, and it does make it difficult to generate a nicely illustrated article. Keep in mind, though, that many of the other Wikimedia wikis prohibit fair use images completely, just like other nonfree content, so Wikipedia is actually on the permissive end of the spectrum.
- As far as promotional images, I can give you plenty of examples. Promotional images can definitely be used to illustrate articles about deceased celebrities, like Milton Berle, Red Buttons and Marilyn Monroe. I believe a promotional image of a television, movie or cartoon character is permitted in an article about that character, although some extremists might challenge such a use. Look at Homer Simpson, Jack Bauer, Fox Mulder and Callie Torres for examples. Also, bands that are no longer together probably qualify, like Led Zeppelin and The Smiths. And I suspect a band like The Residents would qualify because they don't appear in public, even though they're still together. Then there's the situation of promotional photos of celebrities in their prime, when the celebrity is now elderly and doesn't look the same. This particular case is not clear, but I think most knowledgable users would agree this use is permitted. I hope these examples help! --Butseriouslyfolks 05:19, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
Times-standard
I agree. I've blocked for 2 days for sockpuppetry and spamming - if they come back I will extend. Thanks for alerting me ck lostsword • T • C 23:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
Cover art
I have a question about what WP:Fair use#Images says about fair use of cover art. Supposedly, fair use of cover art is allowed in the context of critical commentary of an item that the cover art refers to. So for example, if an article like The Pancakes can be expanded to include information about their specific albums, could an image like Image:Pancakes Secret.jpg be used for the sections that discuss the album? That image is the album cover of one of their albums. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 22:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Fair use images to illustrate living persons
It seems most articles in Category:Japanese porn stars are using fair use images just to illustrate what living persons look like. Do you think the use of those images are justified for WP? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 16:41, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, Butseriouslyfolks. To answer the question "And how did you happen to come across those?"-- HongQiGong has had an on-going crusade against this entire category going for years. He has repeatedly mass-nominated for "speedy deletion" articles on subjects as notable as Kyoko Aizome. (He also tried to edit-war the Japan article into a laundry list of Japanese war crimes against China, but that's another story...) His "Speedy-delete" nominations are usually done without an edit summary. This is not the first time he has tried to get other editors to join his crusade. See here, for example. In fact it was Hong's stated desire to censor this entire category that inspired me to work on improving these articles. Believe me, I've got other interests, but I have a strong faith in Intellectual Freedom. I noticed that Hong has counted on no one else caring enough about this category to defend it, and so this is the category I've chosen in which to do most of my editing work. I've spent months searching for what I could determine to be legitimate promotional photos, which I used to replace images of DVD covers, etc. which are clearly not acceptable to illustrate an article on an actress. I would appreciate a conversation with you on why these promotional photos are not usable, (for instance, in the case of retired actresses, how can a free image be obtained?). As for HongQiGong, he has repeatedly made it known that his intent is simply to remove this entire category from Wikipedia. Dekkappai 20:08, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
Butseriouslyfolks, not to intend to drag some old dispute onto your talk page here, but all I can say is that I have never stated that I want to remove the entire category. But I do think that many of those articles are of people who are not notable. For many of them, the only assertion of notability seems to be that an actress has starred in X number of DVDs, with X being any random number from something like 15 to 30. Any AfDs on those articles, unfortunately, will have Dekkappai sounding out a trumpet call to members of WikiProject Japan and WikiProject Pornography, and members from these WikiProjects just vote to "keep" en masse. This is all I'm going to say in my own defense so as not to drag a dispute onto your talk page. As far as the images are concerned, however, whether or not they should remain on WP should be judged on their own merit. Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 20:17, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
The Humanoid Project
You placed a speedy deletion request on The Humanoid Project page. I noticed that a bot had left a cv suspicion notice yesterday, just as soon as the material was posted. The bot seems to have responded to external links, with no sign of any copyrighted material having been posted on the Wikipedia page. I have posted a hangon to contest the speedy deletion request, with information similar to this on the talk page. There is no copyright violation on the page, only normal (expected) practice of providing external references. I hope this can be resolved as quickly as possible. --Rogerfgay 09:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
- Re: your comments re: The Humanoid Project No copyrighted material was posted on the page. The material used from the website is not copyright protected. Even if it was, the quotes were so short and properly cited, that it wouldn't be a copyright infringement or plagerism. I added the reference to provide proper citation, not in response to copyright questions. That's too much information I suppose, because the material used is not copyright protected. I'm inclined to return it to its former state, which was more complete. --Rogerfgay 16:11, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
User:Butseriouslyfolks - I think there's a way to notify without posting on your user page. I'm relatively new at Wikipedia, so please let me know if there's a more efficient way than to write a comment on your user page every time I respond to your comment on mine. (Do you have the other page on watch?) Also - I'd rather have the discussion re: issues on The Humanoid Project page on that page's talk page rather than my User page. I have The Humanoid Project page on my watch list. --Rogerfgay 17:54, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Hello
Hi, You put a copyright notice on a page I created (MetaBase). I have replied on the talk page (Talk:MetaBase). I wonder what the next step is? Cheers --Dan|(talk) 06:48, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Hey
Can I talk to you off-wiki (by IRC or e-mail)? --Iamunknown 03:23, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- E-mail is fine. One's headed your way. --Iamunknown 03:49, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- E-mail is sent. --Iamunknown 03:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
