User talk:Bonjourleworld

Ohio-Indiana Mennonite Conference
Did you check, what the duplications actually are? The longest for example is just the title of a book that is the most important source for Old Order Mennonites: Stephen Scott's book: "an introduction to old order and conservative mennonite groups". Then there are parts of references like "http gameo org index php title ohio indiana", "global anabaptist mennonite encyclopedia online", or the in my view the ridiculous "retrieved from". Others are the long names of the groups involved, like "the ohio wisler mennonite conference", "ohio indiana wisler mennonite conference", "the ohio indiana mennonite conference", "the old order mennonites" or names of places like "intercourse pa". Could you please take into account all that, instead of just mechanically count the "duplications"? --Schpringer (talk) 08:48, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


 * I apologize if the template notification did not demonstrate the precise issue at hand. The issue was not so much duplication as it was extremely close paraphrasing of a kind which violates the standards enumerated in WP:Close paraphrasing. Please refer to the article revision history if you require clarification The notification I posted in the article itself links to the problematic source material. It's likely that the material you closely paraphrased is licensed under CC-BY-SA. In that case, your paraphrasing is admissible, although it would be highly preferable that you rephrase the information in your own words. If you wish to maintain the original text, however, you must properly attribute your source--preferably with an in-text citation as well as a in-line footnote. Feel free to let me know if you have any further questions! Bonjourleworld (talk) 20:03, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello from a new NSF-funded legal research project!
Hi there,

I hope this message finds you well! My name is Scott, and I work with a project called SCALES, out of Northwestern University (https://scales-okn.org). We recently received a grant from the National Science Foundation to create a national resource for enabling access to court records and increasing the transparency of the justice system. Here's a paper we published recently in Science discussing the goals of our project, as well as an introductory video.

As you've contributed to the Supreme Court cases WikiProject, I wanted to reach out and inquire into how this SCALES corpus might be useful to you as an editor. We have a great deal of data and metadata about cases in the federal court system that could improve lots of stubs and B-/C-class articles (something I'm personally excited about, since in my brief teenage Wikipedia-editing heyday I was often drawn to working with stubs and new articles...) And in general, I think the SCALES platform will be a powerful tool for empowering citizens to understand the judiciary and its impact on the country, a priority I know many of us share in this topic space.

Let me know if you're interested in talking further and helping us understand how we can work with you. Thanks for your time!

All best,

Scott —Preceding undated comment added 21:51, 14 October 2020 (UTC)