User talk:Sphilbrick/Archive 124

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • Consensus has been reached to delete all books in the book namespace. There was rough consensus that the deleted books should still be available on request at WP:REFUND even after the namespace is removed.
  • An RfC is open to discuss the next steps following a trial which automatically applied pending changes to TFAs.

Technical news

  • IP addresses of unregistered users are to be hidden from everyone. There is a rough draft of how IP addresses may be shown to users who need to see them. This currently details allowing administrators, checkusers, stewards and those with a new usergroup to view the full IP address of unregistered users. Editors with at least 500 edits and an account over a year old will be able to see all but the end of the IP address in the proposal. The ability to see the IP addresses hidden behind the mask would be dependent on agreeing to not share the parts of the IP address they can see with those who do not have access to the same information. Accessing part of or the full IP address of a masked editor would also be logged. Comments on the draft are being welcomed at the talk page.

Arbitration

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 3 July 2021 (UTC)

"Rachmaninoff" section in the "Richard Kogan (physician)" article

Thank you for the notice.
I wonder whether you could make the now-deleted material available to me somewhere so that I could summarize and paraphrase it more than I did, for possible restoration, subject to your approval?
Thanks.
Nihil novi (talk) 18:23, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Nihil novi, I sent it to you by email. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:13, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! I think you will find my new text more acceptable.
Nihil novi (talk) 19:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Deleted page Draft:Australian Romantic & Classical Orchestra

Can I ask why you deleted this draft? I am a former employee of the Australian Romantic & Classical Orchestra and would love to write a WP page for them.

@Hrob5506: It was deleted as a G 13, which happens when a draft has been abandoned for at least six months. If you would like to work on it let me know and I will be happy to restore it for you.--S Philbrick(Talk) 11:58, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

RE: Inside Out

Yes, they were right. Thanks. (CC) Tbhotch™ 00:33, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Thank you for answering all those RD1s.

Scorpions13256 (talk) 00:10, 18 July 2021 (UTC)



Unfair Deletion of One Disease

Hi Sphilbrick, May I ask why you nominated One Disease for deletion. I recreated this page in my own words where is the toolforge.org proof of duplication content or copyright violation? I rewrote the entire content in my own words. RASSIOPEIA (talk) 12:27, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

RASSIOPEIA, See the iThenticate report. It doesn't look like a rewrite to me, what do you think I am missing? S Philbrick(Talk) 12:30, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Sphilbrick, the following link is asking for login, please provide me a valid proof, why it doesn't seems a rewrite to you. RASSIOPEIA (talk) 12:55, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
RASSIOPEIA, I sent an email, can send you a screen shot but I need an email address. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:22, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
(talk page watcher) The iThenticate report can be accessed by anyone using the CopyPatrol permalink, which is here. That link clearly shows that pretty much the entire draft was copied word-for-word from the organization's website. DanCherek (talk) 22:10, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
DanCherek, I thought there was a way to access it I hope that works. Thanks. S Philbrick(Talk) 00:26, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

Girmit Global Museum

Hello My reference #1 was invoked so the # remains but no details. I was asked to contact you to see what the reference was and what I should do to have it included. The site is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Girmit_Global_Museum?action=edit&veswitched=1&oldid=1034198765

Many thanks AwesomeAubergine (talk) 10:04, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

AwesomeAubergine, That was not removed by me, but I tracked it down and placed it back in the draft. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:18, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
I noticed that you revision deleted a couple of copyright vios from that draft, but I think you may have missed one: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Girmit_Global_Museum&oldid=1034165324Jackattack1597 (talk) 20:31, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Jackattack1597,  Done Good catch. I know why I missed it, but that doesn't change the fact that I missed it. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:08, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

How long is the temporary restore for or can use it? AwesomeAubergine (talk) 07:28, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

AwesomeAubergine, My reference to temporary restore simply referred to the edits that had been revision deleted. The revision deletion has been reinstituted so anything that's left visible is fine and can be used. S Philbrick(Talk) 13:09, 20 July 2021 (UTC)


2406:3400:21B:3FF0:6134:2C37:4F55:FB46 (talk) 22:43, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Revdel

Howdy! User talk:ArtResearcher1955 contains more of the copyvio you had just rev-delled, as they say it is their original writing. However, it matches this. They also say they are a gallery, so it's UPE... --- Possibly ☎ 19:12, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion

Hi. Now I can't see the edit so I can not ansewr if it was a violation of our copyright policy. Can you send me that edit ? TIA--Adam majewski (talk) 12:57, 17 July 2021 (UTC)

Adam majewski, Give me a hint S Philbrick(Talk) 16:49, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Configure_script --Adam majewski (talk) 18:11, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
Adam majewski, Sent via email S Philbrick(Talk) 18:17, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
is it "violation of our copyright policy"? --Adam majewski (talk) 19:01, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
Adam majewski, There are basically two questions:
  1. is it too close to some other text, and not one of the exceptions such as pure list data or acceptably short quotations
  2. is that of the text subject to copyright in a way that's not compatible with our licenses
According to the CopyPatrol tool:
CopyPatrol entry
The overlap is 100%
The copyright statement seems to allow broad usage, but it is a GNU license, not a CC license. If I am interpreting Wikipedia:Text of the GNU Free Documentation License correctly, that license isn't good enough. I also thought I read something recently about GNU licensing, but cannot recall where I saw it. I'd be happy to hear my interpretation is wrong, and if so I will happily restore your edit but I need confirmation that Wikipedia accepts that license. S Philbrick(Talk) 20:30, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Keady

I attempted an RD1 request on Keady. You said that the RD1 was completed, but no revisions have disappeared. Was that due to a technical error, or were the edits not redactable? Thank you for your time. Scorpions13256 (talk) 20:49, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

Scorpions13256, simple blunder - thanks for the way you asked. I think I actually did it this time. S Philbrick(Talk) 21:00, 23 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. That is a lot of edits to redact. I can only use that script if the number of diffs that need redacting is less than 500. Scorpions13256 (talk) 21:03, 23 July 2021 (UTC)

August Editathons with Women in Red

Women in Red | August 2021, Volume 7, Issue 8, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 206, 207


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Megalibrarygirl (talk) 22:27, 23 July 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Books & Bytes – Issue 45

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021

  • Library design improvements continue
  • New partnerships
  • 1Lib1Ref update

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2021).

Guideline and policy news

  • An RfC is open to add a delay of one week from nomination to deletion for G13 speedy deletions.

Technical news

  • Last week all wikis were very slow or not accessible for 30 minutes. This was due to server lag caused by regenerating dynamic lists on the Russian Wikinews after a large bulk import. (T287380)

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:19, 1 August 2021 (UTC)

September 2021 at Women in Red

Women in Red | September 2021, Volume 7, Issue 9, Numbers 184, 188, 204, 205, 207, 208


Online events:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Rosiestep (talk) 22:31, 26 August 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Reversion of Mikrani page content

Hi, What copyright violation did you find in this edit here? didn't you find the sentences are well-cited? ReyAz. 13:31, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Your edit is a close paraphrase of material in the site I mentioned this. Do you disagree? Is there some other reason for the match. (I'm traveling, so if we need to discuss in detail, this will have to wait until Sunday)S Philbrick(Talk) 13:23, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – September 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2021).

Administrator changes

readded Jake Wartenberg
removed Emperor • Viridian Bovary
renamed Ashleyyoursmile → Viridian Bovary

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

  • The Score extension has been re-enabled on public wikis. It has been updated, but has been placed in safe mode to address unresolved security issues. Further information on the security issues can be found on the mediawiki page.

Arbitration

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

reveresion of recent edit

Hi, What copyright violation did you find in this edit - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sanand_Plant_%28Tata_Motors%29&type=revision&diff=1042730388&oldid=1042693665 The lines are taken from a press release of the company, and shouldn't be a copyright problem. Or should I paraphrase the lines differently?

I identified the source in my edit summary, which does appear to be a press release. Press releases are typically subject to full copyright. --S Philbrick(Talk) 17:02, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion

Hi! you deleted my edit recently at Economy of Pakistan due to so called copyright infringement. The text in my edit is taken from NEPRA official report which is pakistan government institution. According to the Copyright Ordinance, 1962 of Pakistan, governments works or publications are in public domain and their reproduction is not prohibited unless specified. please check the document, there is no such specification included. so, please undo your reversion. Thanks! Mohammad Adnon Khan (talk) 15:42, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Mohammad Adnon Khan, I did not find any notice that the material was public domain, but I'll be happy to revert if I can see confirmation that it is in the public domain. I'm happy to hear that government works of Pakistan are in the public domain, that is not the case for many countries. I'll try checking Commons to see if it it stated there. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:06, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Mohammad Adnon Khan, I looked at the law: https://wipolex.wipo.int/en/text/129351. It doesn't match your assertion.
22.—(1) Copyright in a Government work shall, where Government is the first owner
of the copyright therein, subsist until fifty years from the beginning of the calendar year next
following the year in which the work is first published.
(2) In the case of a work of an international organization to which the provisions of
section 53 apply, copyright shall subsist until fifty years from the beginning of the calendar
year next following the year in which the work is first published. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:13, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
Mohammad Adnon Khan, See also Commons which does not support your claim. I hope you are right, but your claim conflicts with the Commons summary and with my reading of the law. S Philbrick(Talk) 17:14, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
@Sphilbrick Okay! you are right, but are you supposed to delete the whole edit which includes table and a paragraph, or just the paragraph part which was copied. the data in the table was put together by myself. ??? Mohammad Adnon Khan (talk) 10:40, 7 September 2021 (UTC)
Mohammad Adnon Khan, I understand your point, but it is accepted practice to revert the entire edit. In fact, if there are multiple consecutive edits by the same editor, the rollback option is used, on the assumption that there may be other issues in other edits. Let me know if you would like me to email you the content so that you can recover noninfringing material. Actually, I'll just do that. S Philbrick(Talk) 11:05, 7 September 2021 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion Harivansh Rai Bachchan

As per the talk you have reverted my updates as copyright issues. I have updated the details from various sources and updated citation to eloborate the details. I do not see any copyright issues by providing the information which could enhance the knowledge of the people refering the details. I have also provided the citation to provide the sources from where the details are picked so that readers can be sure that right information is provided and not just imagination. Can you let me know if I need to provide any clarifications for any link or details. I am ready to provide and help so that we all as readers can take advantage of the information. Thank you for being proactive to check the copyright issues of the articles published, which is unfortunately not in my case Sridharkamath (talk) 18:20, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Sridharkamath, While you may have gathered information from various sources, your edit had a 96% overlap with this site. I have seen situations where sites such as blog posts have copied material from Wikipedia, but given that your edit was today it seems hard to believe that someone copied that material so quickly. Do you have any thoughts on how this could have happened? S Philbrick(Talk) 19:08, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
Sphilbrick, I have ,modified the article based on the facts and the details , so it is likely to be found in other articles also. the details you reverted are from news paper articles and books. which was cited properly providing the details of the article name. I can only find that the link provided as your justification of copyrights is taken from various sources and copied as the blogspot. also the source is not verified. If you are pointing for the copy paste from the link mprovided by the BOT I would like to clarify that that this is not the case. Sridharkamath (talk) 21:02, 9 September 2021 (UTC)

Question re. edits to my page

Apologies for reaching out to you like this, but my page (Peter Gleick) is being vandalized by JLakely of the Heartland Institute. You've previously weighed in on edits to this page and the Heartland incident described there (a decade ago), but last month Lakely (a senior employee of Heartland) again made major edits to the lede and that specific section. Someone deleted them, but he's re-posted them. If you feel it appropriate, please revert again to the long-time version previously on the page. Thank you. PGleick (talk) 22:40, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 46

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021

  • Library design improvements deployed
  • New collections available in English and German
  • Wikimania presentation

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --11:15, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

October 2021 at Women in Red

Women in Red | October 2021, Volume 7, Issue 10, Numbers 184, 188, 209, 210, 211


Online events:


Special event:


See also:


Other ways to participate:

Facebook | Instagram | Pinterest | Twitter

--Rosiestep (talk) 01:37, 29 September 2021 (UTC) via MassMessaging

Administrators' newsletter – October 2021

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2021).

Guideline and policy news

Technical news

Arbitration

  • A motion has standardised the 500/30 (extended confirmed) restrictions placed by the Arbitration Committee. The standardised restriction is now listed in the Arbitration Committee's procedures.
  • Following the closure of the Iranian politics case, standard discretionary sanctions are authorized for all edits about, and all pages related to, post-1978 Iranian politics, broadly construed.
  • The Arbitration Committee encourages uninvolved administrators to use the discretionary sanctions procedure in topic areas where it is authorised to facilitate consensus in RfCs. This includes, but is not limited to, enforcing sectioned comments, word/diff limits and moratoriums on a particular topic from being brought in an RfC for up to a year.

Miscellaneous

  • Editors have approved expanding the trial of Growth Features from 2% of new accounts to 25%, and the share of newcomers getting mentorship from 2% to 5%. Experienced editors are invited to add themselves to the mentor list.
  • The community consultation phase of the 2021 CheckUser and Oversight appointments process is open for editors to provide comments and ask questions to candidates.
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Since I'm mystified and you might know what reFill is...

I did a search for the name of a web API and found the strangest things... Searching for "querySelector" found edits like yours of 24 June. Notice the inserted text having that word and how it reads in Louella_Tomlinson#References. I've just deleted such like from another page, but see the same goof in at least two others. Could they have been using this (apparently broken) tool? Shenme (talk) 01:57, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sphilbrick/Archive_124&oldid=1081556798"