Talk:Henri Fauconnier

Translation concerns
clear reference to French wiki, not copyrightvio, but i will stop editing this page until you clear your false positive banner. Pohick2 (talk) 16:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * this abuse of the speedy delete process is enlightening Pohick2 (talk) 16:29, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you could enlighten us as to why the material IS a word-for-word duplicate of the article at http://www.speedylook.com/Henri_Falconer.html. Are you suggesting that this "speedylook" page is a translation of the French Wikipedia page? Or perhaps that the French Wikipedia page is a translation of the speedylook page? I don't see any abuse of the speedy tag, but someone might be abusing a legal copyright. Accounting4Taste: talk 16:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have declined the speedy, as I believe that both pages are equally bad machine translations. They are not word-for-word the same. For example, this article says:

The tagged page says:


 * Who knows? Perhaps they used the same machine? --Moonriddengirl (talk) 16:56, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * the google machine translation seems to be repeatable, but given the 2008 French last update, has the bad machine improved? the really tedious part is changing all the present tense into past tense.
 * this is not the first time this bot and machine have produced this result. do you really want to assert that French wiki is wholesale copying from speedy.  or is it more likely that speedy is copying with a google machine - say could we get the speedy folks to do the same for wiki translation project (well they're not that comprehenive)
 * i do know just how much to change to avoid your bot, it's just tiresome. isn't it abuse of Speedy Delete when the article is clearly marked French wiki, hence an assertion of CC license. Pohick2 (talk) 17:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I imagine the machine has improved somewhat; they're always asking people to help it out. I don't believe it was an abuse of the speedy delete template, because if you had copied their translation without credit you would be violating their copyright. Licenses require proper attribution. There's enough differences, though, to make it obvious that you didn't copy it from them. It's not my bot, so I can't change what websites it picks up, but there may be sufficient value in evaluating for copyright violations of that sort to keep it around. That's really Coren's call. The bot's job is not to mark copyright violations, but to flag potential problems for human evaluation. I'm sure it would be tiresome to explain every time; if the site is not excluded from the bot's scan, it might be worth producing a template for the talk page. I use those quite often to save myself the headache of retyping the same thing over and over again. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:32, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * how do you like the copy-edit. is there still too much French la vie en rose? Pohick2 (talk) 18:16, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * A bit, but it is such a difficult job. :) I have cleaned up some, but some of the material still remains difficult for me to follow. I've tagged a few problematic points, and maybe somebody can come in and help clear these up. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 19:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * ca n'est rien, it's a little essayish, like a lot of French wiki, (i was surprised to find links to palm oil). but i'll leave it as a start.
 * a quibble but "man of leisure", is a little more than "free time", all these connotations of boulevadier, Bob le flambeur, etc. but i leave it to you. Pohick2 (talk) 20:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If the idiomatic "man of leisure" is what's wanted, the best way to reach it is by employing the idiom. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 21:22, 9 February 2010 (UTC)