User talk:Diannaa/Archive 61

Copyvio concerns
Hi Diannaa. As you are an admin with a lot of experience in copyvio issues, can you have a look at the talk page of EOKA? proposed to add some content to the article. Some editors raised concerns about copyvio issues and Cinadon36 asked me to help them solve the issue. I rewrote the content trying to address copyvio concerns but it seems some editors insist that there are still copyvio issues. The relevant discussion is here. Can you have a look at the case and help solve the problem when time permits? Ktrimi991 (talk) 15:31, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I can copy-paste the said content here if it is easier for you to help in that way. Thanks, Ktrimi991 (talk) 16:04, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Please don't do that. I will get to it later. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:22, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for pinging me Ktrimi991. Diannaa, thanks for your willingness to jump in. Please have in mind that a newer version of the section has been proposed (version 4). My major concern is that other users are claiming that there are COPYVIO problems but when I ask them to point them to me, they say that it is my burden to find them out and fix it. That resulted in proposing several versions of the same section as I blindly change the wording of the text. (Ktrimi991 kindly provided a helping hand as well). Thanks. Cinadon36 (talk) 18:47, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I have had a quick look and I don't think I will be able to help with this issue, mainly because the source is a book, not a website. Also because there appears to be objections to the addition based on reasons other than copyright, and I don't want to give the impression that I have endorsed any particular edit. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:07, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
 * No worries. Giving an opinion on copyvio issues does not indicate an editor is supporting a side in a content dispute. I am actually not supporting or opposing the inclusion of the said content on the article. My only concern is that the editors involved in the content dispute make different claims regarding how in line with WP:COPYVIO the content is, thus the editors are not able to solve the content dispute. Is there any noticeboard or anything else that can confirm whether the content respects WP:COPYVIO or not? Ktrimi991 (talk) 19:16, 31 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Dianna. Please check this sample string and this proposed addition by Cinadon. There are many more copyvios where this came from. It is astonishing to me that Cinadon, after I gave him repeated advice about copyvios, still tells you That resulted in proposing several versions of the same section as I blindly change the wording of the text. as if he has no understanding when he plagiarises text and as if he cannot trace back his steps and check what text he copies from a book and how he copies it. Cinadon is also a very prolific text writer. I cannot keep up with the volume of copyvios he produces and I don't think it is too much to ask from him/her to not plagiarise text and to know when he plagiarises it. Cinadon is also attacking my efforts, at talk:EOKA, to advise him/her on how to improve and does not take responsibility of his copyvios, acting as if he doesn't understand how to check for them in his own edits. Please see wikilawyering examples 1, 2, 3 where he admits no culpability or shows no indication of introspection regarding his copyvios and his obligation not to plagiarise, and instead s/he is trying to put the onus on me to tell him/her where his copyvios are. And that is on top of his/her POV and novel-like prose, to comments about which he does not respond or s/he responds in a facetious manner. Thank you and take care. Dr.   K.  23:57, 31 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Dianna. I just think that whenever someone is making a claim that there is a problem with an edit (Copyvio, Npov, or whatever) he must at least point to one example. It is a 4 paragraph long section and this kind of approach is not constructive- quite the contrary I might say. I have changed and paraphrased parts of the proposed text several times blindly as I do not always have the book in my hand. Please note that this is the first time that Dr.K. presents quote as a copyvio (which is and I will change the sentence). Bear in mind that concerns on my edits were raised the first minute, by Dr.K. who was claiming that prof David French (uni professor of British military history specialized in 20th-century conflicts) and his book (published 2015 and very well cited already) are not Reliable Sources. You can have a look at the discussion at the RS Noticeboard. This feels like a filibustering technique to me- we are talking about a single section since 22 October 2018 and we are going nowhere. As for wikilawyering, I am sure if you look at the TalkPage, you can see who is wikilawyering, bringing in the table of discussion names of policies without the specific policies supporting their claim (ie WP:Weasel or WP:Burden). As for novel-style prose of the article, even if there was, should it be a reason not to add the proposed text on the article? Wikipedia is not perfect, and won't ever be. I have made a contribution to the facts, someone else can make a contribution to the style. As for NPOV, I have attributed French's opinions, but if there are concerns about NPOV, he/she/they can make comments and improve the article. Claiming that there is npov and not explaining anything further is quite frustrating. Please have in mind that more sections are in the queue. .Cinadon36 (talk) 06:05, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Please note that this is the first time that Dr.K. presents quote as a copyvio (which is and I will change the sentence). You still have not answered my question: Why are you unwilling or unable to find your own WP:PLAGIARISM? Do you not know when you copy whole sentences from a book? Why are you unaware that you copy whole sentences from a book? Why if someone points to the fact that you plagiarised, can you not go back, retrace your steps, and by comparing what the book says and what you wrote, can you not find the plagiarism? Until you give a satisfactory answer to these simple, yet fundamentally important questions, I suggest you refrain from littering Wikipedia with your WP:PLAGIARISM. As far as your nonsense about "filibustering", get this straight: There is nothing "filibustering" about someone pointing to you your serial copyvios and your responsibility to not plagiarise. Only a person with your WP:BATTLE, WP:IDHT attitude would repeatedly accuse someone trying to help you correct your plagiarism problem. At the same time, quite conveniently for you, you are not answering repeated questions why you are unable or unwilling to explain how you got caught copying verbatim sentences from books and why you are unable to retrace your steps to find them. This is a very simple question. I expect you to answer it. Meanwhile, your proposed text has multiple copyvios remaining. I expect you to fix them. In fact, I expect you to withdraw your proposed text, because it is full of copyvios, and cannot be examined or inserted in the article until the copyvios are fixed. Dr.   K.  15:48, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * If Diannaa has something to ask, I will answer.Cinadon36. I would like to ask Diannaa a simple question: If someone is claiming that there are copyvios problems in a proposed text, should he point at them as well? (talk) 16:52, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Dianna. The proposed text contains copyvios and WP:CLOP in several areas. I suggest withdrawing the proposed text until it has been thoroughly vetted for copyvios and cleaned up. This editor wants to open yet another RfC with the proposed copyvio text. S/he erased the previous RfC based on copyvio text, including my proposal that s/he withdraws it, but I restored and archived it subsequently. Now, s/he is thinking about reopening the RfC with a modified but still copyvio text in several parts. This proposed RfC cannot be opened until the copyvios are discovered and eliminated. Thank you. Dr.   K.  17:41, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Dr.K., please provide evidence for your claims, thank you in advance. Cinadon36 (talk) 17:53, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Dr.K., please provide evidence for your claims, thank you in advance. I am copying and pasting from my response to you just above: why are [you] unable or unwilling to explain how you got caught copying verbatim sentences from books and why you are unable to retrace your steps to find them. This is a very simple question. I expect you to answer it. Dr.   K.  18:04, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Diannaa, this is the last time I am bothering you. Have in mind that I created a section in the TalkPage to discuss copyvio claims, but Dr.K. did not participate. Cinadon36 (talk) 17:59, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I am copying and pasting from my response to you just above: why are [you] unable or unwilling to explain how you got caught copying verbatim sentences from books and why you are unable to retrace your steps to find them. This is a very simple question. I expect you to answer it. Dr.   K.  18:02, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Kind reminder, this is the TalkPage of Diannaa.Cinadon36 (talk) 18:36, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Kind reminder, this is the TalkPage of Diannaa. Yes, I know. She is an expert on copyvios, a policy which you violated repeatedly and your copyvios have to be examined. I can't think of a better place to discuss them. Also, I didn't open this thread. You did. You also started making WP:CLUEless allegations against me. I had to respond. But you still haven't answered my simple questions above. So, instead of giving reminders, please explain why can you not clean up after yourself? Dr.   K.  18:46, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Look, the first reason, is that I just dont like your tone, it is not civil in my opinion. The second, you own some answers yourself (why dont you tell what the copyvio problems are so we can go on) Third why dont you participate in the section to discuss copyvio concerns. Fourth, I will answer questions by Diannaa, not you- because of the first reason. Cinadon36 (talk) 18:50, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Look, the first reason, is that I just dont like your tone, it is not civil in my opinion. You are entitled to your opinion. But you are not entitled to your cocky attitude through all this, and your dismissive and attacking replies, a few of which have been linked in my first post above. You are being very evasive and you are not replying to my simple questions. Your WP:IDHT attitude is clear. The second, you own some answers yourself (why dont you tell what the copyvio problems are so we can go on) Third why dont you participate in the section to discuss copyvio concerns. I already gave you an example of your WP:PLAGIARISM. I did my part. Do you seriously expect me to clean up the rest of your copyvio mess? I don't have that kind of time. Once more, you should clean up after yourself. But I told you that before, didn't I? Only thing is, judging from your responses and your lack of accepting responsibility for your copyvios, it didn't register with you. Dr.   K.  19:19, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * When you are keep throwing cards of policies that do not fit the situation. After 2 weeks of discussing, you pointed to a single copyvio problem a couple of hours ago. I do not expect you to fix it, I did it. If Diannaa has any questions, I will gladly reply. You can ask me in another venue though because if we start talking here, most prob. Dianna will just tldr, and wont answer my question. Cinadon36 (talk) 19:27, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I know, you want to have the last word. But, if so, don't keep badgering me with more nonsense to which I have to reply. After 2 weeks of discussing, you pointed to a single copyvio problem a couple of hours ago. Ok, I'll play along. Why did I have to point the copyvio to you? Why could you not find it yourself? Once more, can you explain how you copied whole sentences from a book and why can you not perform such a simple task as retracing your steps to find your copyvios? Why must you depend on me to find your copyvios? What is the reason you keep asking me to point them out to you? Can you please explain? The amount of time you spent badgering me to fix your copyvios, or trying to evade my simple questions, if you had spent it trying to find them, you would have cleaned them up, at least some of them. I do not expect you to fix it, I did it. Yes, that was after I pointed it out to you. Now, do something different going forward: Go and find the rest of your copyvios by yourself, and don't badger me any longer to find them for you. Can you do that? Dr.   K.  19:58, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Lets see if Diannaa pays any attention to us after this discussion. I am not very confident... Cinadon36 (talk) 20:08, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Is there a copyvio problem here
Dear Diannaa, here I added the extender paragraph from the book of David French "Fighing EOKA" in the ref template as a comment. Please have a look and let me know whether there are copyvio or clop problems. (This is the last version of the proposed paragraph) Cinadon36 (talk) 10:04, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Makarios was sent to exile in Seychelles on 9 March 1956, that gave Grivas more free space to act more violently. As French notes, in this period EOKA carried two separate campaigns, one aiming the British administration and the other one those Greek Cypriots who were not supportive of its cause. In order to distract security forces from the struggle in Troodos, EOKA intensified house bombing and riots in the urban areas. Youngsters had a prominent role in accomplishing those tasks. Personnel of security forces as well as members of the public were targets. Later, during January 1957, after the pressure by Harding's forces at the mountains of Troodos was increased, Grivas commenced a more delicate strategy of ordering town groups to attack Turkish Cypriot members of the police forced hoping that doing so was bound to provoke intercommunal violence, so the government would be forced to retract troops from the mountains. Guerrillas assaulted a group of Turkish Cypriot policemen in Paphos killing one of them. This incident sparked bloody inter-communal protests in Nicosia the next day. In total there were 104 date house bombings, 53 riots, 136 acts of sabotage, 403 ambushes, 35 attacks on police, 38 attacks on soldiers and 43 raids on police stations.As for the death toll there were 77 dead men in Security Forces, 70 Greek Cypriot-(most of them alleged as traitors) 2 Turkish Cypriots and 5 British civilians.

Governor Harding carried out a series of operations between April and July that failed to eradicate EOKA but were still a severe blow to the organization. Harding also utilized a counter-terrorist organization (named X-platoon) using as personnel men that had deserted the insurgency, perhaps since September 1956. It has been estimated that in a six-month period the X-platoon killed, captured dozens of EOKA members or supporters. By March 1957 the two opponents, EOKA and the British forces were in a stalemate. Grivas declared truce on 14 March 1957.
 * notes and refs

I have withdraw my proposal, please do not look at this version. I will write another version from the scratch. Thank you. Dr.K. had some valid points, I have to admit.(not all though!)Anywayzz....back to the lab. I am just wondering....what will happen to the copyvios that are present in the TalkPage? Cinadon36 (talk) 19:09, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem on Embargo against Northern Cyprus
Hi Diannaa. You left a message on my talk page at 13:39, 31 October 2018 (UTC), highlighting that I added some content to the above article that appeared to have been copied from http://www.mfa.gov.tr/cyprus-issue-_summary_.en.mfa, and that for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Thank you very much for pointing this out to me. I'm actually a little careful about how I should approach my edits and amendments on this page, and other pages mostly on Cyprus. Previous edits in my own words have seen them attacked by one Dr.K. on the back of what I think are baseless claims that I was using "unsourced diatribe", "politicising (content)" or "POV pushing" etc, followed by threats and hostile rhetoric. On those accusations, his messages to me as well as his attacks on the edits I was making to improve or correct clear POV pushing or badly sourced content, his attacks aimed at discrediting my sources, and his defense of the articles and their demonstrably evident POV pushing, were also laden with strong pro-Greek Cypriot POV pushing and strong anti-Turkish Cypriot POV pushing, so I think he is almost acting as a gatekeeper of misinformation on Wikipedia, on topics regarding Cyprus. But to stop digressing on Dr.K.'s contestable assessments of my edits, I'm just trying to tell you, I think I responded to that by writing too literal and word-for-word based on what I read, to avoid deviating too much from the source and make the edit as robust as possible. That's why this slipped through me. I'll take a look and try to write the parts in question again in my own words, but I can't find what I had written to go back and revise it? Is there a way for me to go back to it and take a look so I can make my revision based on that? It seems to be irretrievable, and it would be a waste of a good few hours of research and reference gathering and draft writing etc, which I hadn't taken note of elsewhere. Thanks in advance Diannaa. Nargothronde (talk) 00:34, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I've sent you the removed material via email. It's okay to use quotations, but the surrounding prose was also copied from the source document (http://www.mfa.gov.tr/cyprus-issue-_summary_.en.mfa) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:12, 1 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you Diannaa. I'll have a look and see what I can do to rewrite this section. Nargothronde (talk) 01:55, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Paul David Manson
Good morning! I noticed that you removed copyrighted material that had been added to this article, hid the diffs and restored the previous version. Thank you for that. The same editor seems to have once again added the same content again, plus a lot more, what I would term "fluffy" content, while having previously removed anything controversial from the article. I should point out that all his edits are to this article only, plus a single Teahouse question that makes me think he is in a COI. I particular note the use of the term "we" there. The article now looks like it has been sanitized by a paid publicist. I was wondering if you could have a look at the most recent edits and see if you think some further admin action is required. - Ahunt (talk) 11:28, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Ahunt. I have checked the new version and it's okay from a copyright point of view. I've placed some info about COI on the user's talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:08, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Super, thank you for looking at it! - Ahunt (talk) 12:41, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * He has responded on his user talk page and has indicated a clear COI there as he is the son of the article subject. - Ahunt (talk) 13:46, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I figured he was a relative. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:01, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I was thinking that too, by the efforts to sanitize the page of controversies. For now I have tagged the page as having been edited by someone in a COI/neutrality, but it will need to be restored to its pre-COI version at some point. You will see in the article hist that he is more than willing to edit war to remove any negative information about his father, even though it was all properly sourced and complied with WP:BLP. How would you recommend proceeding? - Ahunt (talk) 14:28, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't think it's important enough to edit war over, which is why I didn't restore it. The source articles are permanent dead links, so there's no way at this point to check what they say. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:55, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I pointed to the details at WP:COI to him and he agreed to stop editing the article. It either needs a clean-up to remove the fluffy stuff or a revert to the pre-COI version. There was a controversy section which he removed, but it all complied with WP:COI and was referenced to WP:RS. - Ahunt (talk) 22:09, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyvios by Cinadon
Hi Dianna. Please see my posts at the Help Desk and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Copyright Cleanup where I have enumerated some of Cinadon's copyvios. These copyvios are still at talk:EOKA. I am also concerned that Cinadon is using excessive quotations in his/her edits at talk:EOKA. This is a violation of fair use. Thank you. Dr.  K.  09:57, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Dr.K. Sorry but I don't have time to get involved in this particular case. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Dianna, two "Sorry" in one reply? You make me feel sorry for causing the disturbance of asking you. But I fully understand. No problem. Take care. Dr.   K.  18:42, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Fun fact: in Canada, "Sorry" means both hello and goodbye. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:55, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * In Canada, eh? Wonderful country, nice people. :) Dr.   K.  02:18, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

RE: Copyright problem: Grigorovich MK-1
Hi, I appreciate you pointing out my mistake, I have recently joined Wikipedia as I was interested in learning how new content is generated and so on. I apologise for making such a mistake; one which I made as I am relatively new to adding information to Wikipedia. I was under the impression that the information was sufficiently different. If it possible, may I enter the information whilst taking your feedback into account (in order to avoid plagiarism) as I am passionate about working with Wikipedia and especially the topic of aviation and air crafts.

Regards --DATSnoopy (talk) 03:38, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi DATSnoopy. If you want to work on revisions, you should do so on a temporary page, as described in the notice I placed on your talk page. Then a copyright clerk or administrator will review it for you and assess. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:27, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Help Me
Can you tell me how i can copy sources from the seuss wiki? because i don't know how to let people know that i copied it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PickleAndPeanutFan (talk • contribs) 06:22, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If you copy material from Wikia, include the licensing data as part of your citation,, or place a notice at the bottom of the page,  , or use the  if you can figure out how to use it. I prefer the hand-made version. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:25, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Unbibium problem
A dilemma way above my pay grade. Appears there is a Unbibium article dating back to 2004, nominated for deletion, but not. Meanwhile, two relatively new editors have been working on Draft:Unbibium, perhaps intended to be a replacement. The latter is more than twice as long as the former. I am guessing it incorporates content from the existing article. When the people working on it submit it, is there a process for a wholesale replacement? How would that acknowledge contributions to the article content that was replaced? Rather than here, I suggest you consider addressing this at the Talk for Draft:Unbibium, as that is where the editors will see it. David notMD (talk) 19:15, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If they decide to incorporate it into mainspace, a history merge will likely be required to make sure the attribution chain is complete. However it could be a school project? If so, perhaps it will remain as a draft. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:04, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Not a school project. Per what was just added to Talk at Draft:Unbibium one of the editors intends to move it into main space and does not understand the conflict. David notMD (talk) 01:12, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I have tried to explain the issue to them but there's actually no way to fix the problem now, other than a history merge, which can only take place after the fact. Once they do the cut-n-paste move, the Template:History merge will have to be applied to the article to get the editing history of the draft merged with the editing history of the article. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:24, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The (impetuous) ComplexRational pasted content from the draft into the existing article, in the process also deleting content from the existing article. No attribution in the Edit summary. I am going to step away from this, as I feel that I am just rubbernecking someone else's accident. David notMD (talk) 01:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I have added a template to the article; that's all that needs to be done. Now one of our history merge people will assess and fix if needed. Thank you, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:16, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

RE: Copyright problem on The Serpent (Da Vinci's Demons)
No problem. You don't have to apologize, you did it well. Thanks for your notice. There was also a copyvio here, and therefore, also here. Could you hide the older edits of those articles? Thanks again. Tajotep (talk) 19:46, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Those are done now as well. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:59, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Butia purpurescens copyright violation
Hi there. Yikes! But I can no longer see what happened exactly... (I understand why). If you don't mind me asking... Was it a lot? -I thought I generally tried to reword stuff and not copy and paste, but must've gotten lazy or something. What did you do? Remove the offending things or rewrite them yourself? If you removed things, could I know what? Maybe I can rewrite it better this time.

Thing is, I just spent the last hours on yet another draft... I don't want to just dump it (added stuff, rewrote a bunch, moved refs around), but I assume it likely still contains the copied text... I could somehow compare it to the article in question to search for sentences that correspond too much... hmm, tricky... Or I could go through the references in this draft to see what's now gone and reword the offending parts -it can't have been that much, I only see two citations gone from that article comparing it to my draft, and it looks like 4-8 sentences. If this is a case of simple removal I can track it down. But it might be easiest if you could tell me specifically what's wrong and what happened so I can adjust text directly in this draft...

This is inconvenient. Sorry for whatever I did. Regards, Leo  86.83.56.115 (talk) 22:31, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Wait up. This isn't going to be as hard to track down and repair as I imagined. Lucky I had the draft. I think I can figure this out myself. Phew. Hmmm, still, better not have this happen. Thanks anyway, Leo  86.83.56.115 (talk) 22:44, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Clarification requested re Steven James Bartlett entry
Hi, Diannaa -

You made a series of deletions in this entry on Oct. 17, 2018. In your message to me, you wrote that you made these delections "as they appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder."

I've reviewed each of these deletions. Each deletion consists of a description under the heading of "Selected Books and Papers" of each cited work's general purpose and content. As I understand this, none of these descriptions require permission from the copyright holder as all of these descriptions have been released as parts of open access abstracts of documents by Steven James Bartlett. This is stated on the opening page of each PDF document to which I provided external links. You can confirm this if you download any of the documents in question.

If you do not agree, please explain. If necessary, I'll rephrase each document description. Please let me know whether I need to do this or whether I have your permission to reinstate what was deleted.

Thanks for your help! Toh59 (talk) 00:05, November 4, 2018‎ (UTC)
 * Hi Toh59. The problem is that the documents are released under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs license, which is not a compatible license, because it does not permit commercial use or derivative works, and our license does. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:09, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Diannaa - Thank you for explaining. I'll make the necessary changes soon.

Toh59 (talk) 00:24, November 4, 2018‎ (UTC)

Alexandria University logo
Hello, Dianna

This is a new Alexandria University logo, I published it by request from Alexandria university administration, because I'm a content manager at Alexandria university official website, Alexandria university started work by this logo on February 2016, for more details you can join our website and confirm this details

www.alexu.edu.eg

with my best wishes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sherif.Othman1 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It's a non-free logo, and you should not have uploaded it to the Commons, as they do not accept non-free images. It can be uploaded locally as fair use. I will copy it over for you. Since you are working for the university, you should not be editing the article at all, as you have a conflict of interest. I have placed some information on that topic on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:32, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

My "cut-and-pastes"
Thank you Diannaa, for your "fixes". I wasn't aware I was messing anything up. The museum and office building had changed names, but no one did anything yet to the article titles. There is another 2 I've done recently; I guess I have to go to that linkie you gave me.Shaggylawn65 (talk) 17:57, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Your changes to the Emilio Aguinaldo article
Diannaa,

This edit caught my eye. Thanks for trying to help, but there is a problem. Your ecit summary said, in part, "Attribution: Content in this section was copied from Battle of Manila (1898) on November 2, 2018. Please see the history of that page for full attribution". Please read or re-read WP:V and WP:RS. Supporting sources for the material you added would probably be the sources cited in the WP article whefre you got the material, and those sources need to be cited directly in the article where you inserted the material. I took a quick look at the two articles and there appears to be a difference in citation style between the two articles, so the style of the cites would probably need to be modified to fit the style used in the article where the material is being inserted. I would have tried to fix this myself and to clean up some citation problems I see in the article where you inserted the material, but I just don't have the time right now. Please add appropriate supporting cites to the material you added here. When I have some time, I'll try to revisit this article and do some cleanup. Thank you. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 22:30, 4 November 2018 (UTC) Hi again. I made the comment above before checking your user stats. I now see that you are an admin and a very experienced editor. If I had not been so rushed that I made the comment before I checked those stats, I would have made that comment in different terms, but the thrust of the comment would have been the same. I'm also an admin and an experienced editor, and I sometimes (some recently, actually) rush my edits and get called on it by other editors. Been there, done that. Done worse, actually, and wasn't at all happy with some of my edits on re-examination. The style of the above comment would be an example of my rushing edits too much. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:05, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Attribution belongs in, is required to be in, a supporting citation in the article prose -- not in an edit summary
 * Cited sources must be reliable sources
 * Wikipedia is not a reliable source.
 * Diannaa did not add any content to the article. She provided the CC BY-SA required attribution since the editor that added the content did not. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 23:26, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The content was added by an anon user with . The edit appeared at CopyPatrol as a potential copyright violation. Investigating, I discovered that the editor had copied within Wikipedia without providing the attribution as required under the terms of our license. So I added the required attribution via edit summary and advised the user how to do it properly next time. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:07, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

sramana religion
Hi Diana,

I created sramana religion page, with appropriate reliable sources, to indicate the fact that sramana religion is parallel religion to brahmana religion in antiquity. Sramana religion is contemporarily a branch of Jainism whereas brahmana religion is contemporarily part of Hinduism. Naturally, Sarah Welch, a hindu and Joshua Jonathan, a Buddhist ; want to suppress this information and reckon that this information is not important enough to warrant a separate article. Wanted to know you opinion in that regard, since, you are a neutral party to this debate. Thanks. Kundakundakunda (talk) 05:03, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry but I am not interested in giving an opinion on this. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:58, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

IFRS 16 removed copyright content that was taken directly from the EU law (EUR-lex)
Hi Diannaa,

you deleted part of my contribution to IFRS 16 article due to copyright issues. You also deleted quotations and references to the EU law currently in force. Does it mean that the law in force is also subject to copyright? For example, you deleted this:

--- Additionally, the cost of right-of-use asset includes also: ---
 * any lease payments made at or before the commencement date, less any lease incentives received;
 * any initial direct costs incurred by the lessee; and
 * an estimate of costs to be incurred by the lessee in dismantling and removing the underlying asset, restoring the site on which it is located or restoring the underlying asset to the condition required by the terms and conditions of the lease.

I know that it is not a good idea to cut an article into pieces, so it's OK that you deleted all of this as previous parts had copyright issues as I did not pay enough attention to this matter. I'm writing this to ask you whether the law (in this case published in Official Journal of the European Union) is also subject to copyright protection?

regards Marek Marek Muc (talk) 21:45, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
 * You are correct, I removed some snippets that are actually okay to use, but there's no point leaving them in the article with no context. Copyright law for material at https://eur-lex.europa.eu is covered by this legal notice. It's okay to copy from their websites as long as you acknowledge that it is copied and provide a source url. I suggest adding this statement as part of your citation: "Content is copied from this source, which is (c) European Union, 1995-2018. Reuse is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged." — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:02, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

OK, it's clear, thanks, you can delete this section from your talk page if you want Marek Muc (talk) 11:17, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Proof of Copyrighted

 * 1)Bad Faith Norminating (Politic)

Thita Manitkul (via WP:PROD on 30 October 2018), Thita Manitkul (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs | views) https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_found_with_thitarangsitpol_OR_148083379

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/323508509 There is actually another copy, freely licensed by the Thailand Ministry of Defense's Drug Rehabilitation Center and Career Training Schools photostream at https://www.flickr.com/photos/157145480@N04/43090777230 and that photostream shows several photos that include this person. The photostream contains several duplicates of which most are low resolution images that seem to be photographs or scans of hardcopy photos, but other digital photos are of a higher resolution. The photostream this image came from, which may be her personal user account, shows several of the identical images as those by the Thailand Ministry of Defense's Drug Rehabilitation Center and Career Training Schools. Personally I'll COM:AGF on this unless you know otherwise. Ww2censor 16:43, 10 October 2018 (UTC) 2403:6200:88A6:F115:91B4:AD95:C6ED:9E75 00:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
 * 2)


 * 3 Hiding the truth

She wrote

http://www.lnwcars.com/%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%A1%E0%B8%B7%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%87-%E0%B8%82%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%92%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%A0%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B0/

about

https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Sudarat_at_Batman_V_Superman_Dawn_of_Justice_Midnight_Run_Bangkok.jpg#mw-jump-to-license

This politician and the person who upload photo of the politician and Sry88 who's the problem is very similar Sry86

and https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/864340558 the person who contributes to that page Sudarat Keyuraphan Nafy632

the Sockpuppet farm Nafy633 that also had similar name

I am sure both Sockpuppet Nafy633 and Sry88 did it for Political Result.

The Politician with the skill to put on an act https://www.google.com/search?q=%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B8%E0%B8%94%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%99%E0%B9%8C%20%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%AB%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%A3%E0%B8%96%E0%B8%AB%E0%B8%B2%E0%B9%80%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%B5%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%87%20%E0%B8%AA%E0%B8%A3%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%A0%E0%B8%B2%E0%B8%9E%E0%B8%A3%E0%B9%89%E0%B8%AD%E0%B8%87%E0%B9%83%E0%B8%AB%E0%B9%89คนนครศรีธรรมราชรักผู้พันปราง (talk) 14:13, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

From

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:%E0%B8%A2%E0%B8%B4%E0%B9%88%E0%B8%87%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%81%E0%B8%A9%E0%B8%93%E0%B9%8C_%E0%B8%8A%E0%B8%B4%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%A7%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%95%E0%B8%A3_%E0%B9%81%E0%B8%9F%E0%B8%99%E0%B8%84%E0%B8%A5%E0%B8%B1%E0%B8%9A 2403:6200:88A6:F115:9CDF:FED3:E7A3:3720 (talk) 05:41, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Image removal for Zhou Brothers
Hi Diannaa. I noticed that a page I edited a few months ago, back in March to be precise, was stripped of its images. I received permission to use these images, and an image release form was emailed directly to Wikipedia as such. Maybe, I might have missed a step. I was hoping you could provide additional details of what I can do to get those images uploaded again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spaneli23 (talk • contribs)
 * The images were on the Commons. Please provide evidence of permission by either providing a link to a site with an explicit release under a free license or by sending a declaration of consent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. There's full instructions at Commons:OTRS. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:27, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem regarding the plot I've added to page "Aavida Maa Aavide".
Hi there, thank you for your concern but I've been authentic and had written the plot in my own words rather than copy-paste the sentences as it is from another source (like IMDb, etc.). Initially, before adding the plot in my own words, I did copy pasting but then I removed it and added my own words/sentences to the movie.

I hope any strong action won't be taken against me. I'm really sorry for any wrong doing if I'd done. Thanks once again.

With regards, PrototypeEngineer ProtoypeEngineer (talk) 05:21, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Please don't add copyright material to Wikipedia, not even temporarily for editing. It's okay, people make mistakes. Don't do it any more and you will be fine. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:03, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Comment removed
I removed a comment by, which was phrased in intemperate language. The original can be found in the edit history. -- The Anome (talk) 10:41, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
 * could use some more revdel. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 14:17, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Done, and a further explanation provided to the editor as to what the problem is. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:32, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Greetings from the Arbcom Recruitment Kittens!
We've got some former arbs in the mix for WP:ACE2018, but we need more fresh blood bright-eyed and bushy-tailed first-time candidates! Okay, so cleaning up copyvio is probably objectively more important than most arbcom drama, but still, think about it... :) Opabinia regalis (talk) 07:52, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * +1. You’d be great at it Diannaa. You’re easily one of the best administrators on this project. TonyBallioni (talk)
 * 100% agree, this would be most welcome. ~ Amory  (u • t • c) 12:52, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , May I half kiddingly suggest that anyone who wants you her to sign up for ARBCOM has to promise to find enough copyright knowledgeable editors to replace your her CopyPatrol work. My best guess is that this would require four very active volunteers. S Philbrick  (Talk)  15:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

A question
I see that using quotation marks are required for the contents which are copied from the source. My question is if there's a limit for using copied contents? For example, can 4 lines of a book be used accompanied by quotation marks? -- M h hossein   talk 13:30, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Mhhossein. There's no set limit on the size or number of quotations. That said, Wikipedia articles should for the most part be written in our own words, and quotations used only when absolutely necessary. Don't use a quotation if you can readily re-write the material in your own words. Ideas need to be credited though; for example (from Hitler) "According to Kershaw, the consensus of nearly all historians is that van der Lubbe actually set the fire.[159] Others, including William L. Shirer and Alan Bullock, are of the opinion that the NSDAP itself was responsible.[160][161]". Please see Non-free content, especially Non-free content, and the essay Quotations for more details. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the swift response and for the links you provided. I meant to ask if in every quotation the size of the copied content is limited? Long quotes are allowed? -- M h hossein   talk 17:06, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Non-free content says "Brief quotations of copyrighted text may be used to illustrate a point, establish context, or attribute a point of view or idea"; "Extensive quotation of copyrighted text is prohibited." When in doubt, don't do it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:10, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much. I'll review Non-free content. -- M h hossein   talk 17:25, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

RD1 review
I'm trying to clear out some of the RD1 requests. I have a couple questions about Draft:Stott's College.

The text originally appeared in a Sydney newspaper in 1927. Australia became part of the Berne Convention in 1928 (Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Australia) so this predates the Berne Convention. I'm not on top of the Australian copyright law in 1927.

The page has a copyright notice at the bottom: © Copyright Obituaries Australia, 2010-2018

I don't know whether this means they are asserting copyright over this obituary, or are generically asserting copyright over anything on this page other than that which might be public domain. It's my understanding that once something is in the public domain, it could be incorporated into other sites and documents but the subsequent user cannot claim copyright over the public domain material. However, I don't know for sure that the original text is now in the public domain.

Any thoughts?-- S Philbrick (Talk)  15:04, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * (1) The website has no right to assert copyright over a document published in the Sydney Morning Herald in 1927. (2) The Commons:Hirtle chart offers some advice on how to determine copyright status in the United States. Material has to be in the public domain both in its source country and the United States (because that's where the servers are located) to be acceptable to copy here. I think the rule that applies here is
 * Published 1923 through 1977
 * Solely published abroad, without compliance with US formalities or republication in the US, and not in the public domain in its home country as of the URAA date (1 January 1996)
 * If these assumptions are true, US copyright expires 95 years after publication date (i.e. 2022) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:34, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , Thanks. S Philbrick  (Talk)  20:14, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi and, thanks for the mention.
 * It is the copyright notice that made me request revision deletion, and the information at http://oa.anu.edu.au/copyright/, which explicitly applies to.
 * About the copyright of the original article, if I understand correctly, the death date of the author is relevant yet unknown to us. Revision deletion may be overkill, but I would highly recommend against restoring the deleted text in its unattributed original form. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:01, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyvio check
Diannaa, can you check to see if the text I deleted here is copyrighted? It reads like a copy-paste from somewhere. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 23:16, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It's in all their pdf brochures. I can't find an archived copy that predates the addition but I am convinced all the same. Found some more copyvio added in the same 2009 edit . Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:50, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks again. You're the greatest! :) - BilCat (talk) 00:03, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Russia-United States relations
Thx for the copyright catch. I think, however, it's appropriate to convey Zhuravleva's comments as well. So, following on after the current first sentence, I'd like to add: "Victoria Zhuravleva, Director of the American Studies Program at Russian State University, who writes analytical papers for the Russian gov't on U.S.-Russia relations, said it would be difficult for Trump to improve American–Russian relations given the negative feelings on the U.S. side. She said Congress could block Trump from improving relations and would likely propose new sanctions instead." Hopefully that passes muster? Humanengr (talk) 18:29, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * That's better, but still too closely paraphrased. Here: "Victoria Zhuravleva, Director of the American Studies Program at Russian State University, commented that it will be difficult given the current political climate for Trump to improve the relationship. She said Congress could block Trump's policy proposals and would likely propose new sanctions instead." Just want to comment though, what makes Victoria Zhuravleva's opinion important enough to include in the article? and to note that the source article is nearly two years old already - hardly up-to-date anymore. I don't think you should re-add it. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:50, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Imo, it was prescient at the time and deserves historical mention on that count. I’ll cut out the last sentence. Thx, Humanengr (talk) 19:30, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Will mull. Thx, Humanengr (talk) 19:34, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Black September
Hello, why did you remove the text even though I added the source and made changes in my own words, so that it does not appear to be a copy and paste. I want to restore the text.--Sakiv (talk) 00:54, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Your addition was flagged (twice) by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by another admin and myself. Here is a link to the first bot report; here is a link to the second bot report. Click on the iThenticate links to view the overlap. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * What percentage is acceptable.--Sakiv (talk) 01:03, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No copying at all is acceptable. Write it in your own words. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 01:04, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Anushka Ranjan
Hi. Dainnaa, we have added some minor text for the improvement of the article in Anushka Ranjan page and that text removed due to copyright issue could you please help how i know that text is copyrigh? Thank you.. now page showing in maintenance templet how to resove this .. Thank You.VijaySingh53 (talk) 07:32, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Many web pages have a copyright notice at the bottom. But under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. All prose you add to Wikipedia must be written in your own words. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:58, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Turkish Airlines Fleet
G’day, I tried to move Turkish Airlines Fleet to Turkish Airlines fleet, which has existed as a redirect since 2015. Could you please do the necessaries so that the title conforms with guidelines? Cheers YSSYguy (talk) 19:38, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * All fixed. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:16, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Regarding the deletion of the multi-fragment content
I just deleted all the content that possibly violates copyright (in the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-fragment_algorithm). So, there's no need to delete the article anymore.
 * The current version is okay from a copyright point of view. Thank you for taking care of this. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Regarding Draft Article of Nazrin Hassan
With all due respect, I'm writing my first article on Wikipedia. Due to the absence of a "save button", I initially published the draft article (which is a work in progress) for the sake of not losing my work. I meant to return to the article to edit the sentences to adhere to Wiki's guidelines, but it was speedily deleted. But I talked to the person who removed it and thank God, he has reinstated the article after hearing my side of the story. I hope this time, you'd give me some break by not labelling my work for speedy deletion. Anyway, I was just conforming to Wiki's five principles which states that and I quote, "Wikipedia has policies and guidelines, but they are not carved in stone; their content and interpretation can evolve over time. The principles and spirit matter more than literal wording, and sometimes improving Wikipedia requires making exceptions. Be bold but not reckless in updating articles. And do not agonize over making mistakes: every past version of a page is saved, so mistakes can be easily corrected." Thank you and I love your work on Wikipedia Mwhc00 (talk) 06:19, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Promotional content
Diannaa, I run across a possibly complicated case on the Guyana article. A new user, User:Guyanainformation, has added a large amount of promotional material to the article per this diff. They link to https://www.guyanatourism.com in several places, which is run by a Guyanesen government agency, the Guyana Tourism Authority. As such, I don't known if the website's content is copyrighted or not. The text additions definitely read as tourism copy, but I haven't found any direct lifts from the website. I've also not tried to search on the internet for copyvios, as it is late where I am (way past my bedtime). I've left a warning and problem welcome for prommotions. Any further help would be appreciated. Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 07:41, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find any copyvio either. Removing it as promotional content was the right thing to do. Under current copyright law, the guyanatourism.com is protected by copyright. I can't find any evidence that works of their government are in the public domain, so we have to assume it's copyright. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:03, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

Please
Hello Diannaa, firstly, thank you for the copyright catch. Could you give me a chance to eliminate the Copyright problem of the article Timeline of the Azerbaijan Democratic Republic until tomorrow? Investigation11111 (talk) 17:19, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I listed the article at WP:CP as an alternative to deletion. Please follow the instructions on your talk page as to what to do now. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:58, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Talk:Prader–Willi syndrome
Hi Diannaa. You may wish to check recent additions here. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:47, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok I looked and I checked for copyvio and detected nothing untoward. If you could get more specific about what you are expecting me to see or do that would be great. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:36, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Apologies. I had assumed it was copyvio, as it looked to me very much as if it been copied and pasted from somewhere. Why any of it appears in the Talk page at all is, I guess, another question. Is it an essay? attempts at a better article? someone's draft thesis? Hard to tell. Thanks for looking anyway. Martinevans123 (talk) 22:39, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Otto Skorzeny
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3-sKBR5kS10 Can this go into the External links section or would there be a problem with copyright? I should know this by now. Slight Smile 15:52, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The uploader is not the copyright holder, but it's very likely that the US Army owns this footage. So my opinion is that it's likely public domain — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:58, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks. Slight Smile 16:10, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Lies and slander
I didn't copy anything. You wrote "Please leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions" on my page. Is it copyright to quote and attribute the source? - Informant16] November 17, 2018
 * Hello Informant16. It's okay to add brief quotations, but it's not okay to copy the surrounding prose. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:44, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Unique Reference Number
The sixth pillar of wikipedia is - that your word is law. Change what you need to, but hold the page title. As you have taught me in the past, copyright is on creative content not on reproducing facts. The three definitions that will appear on the stub are as close as I get to a fact. Quite rightly they come from the source named but not argueing that point haven't I changed the text enough to deny the site creative content and claim it myself? Look at the text, oops Roger has already deleted it, but it said:

The Unique Reference Number (URN)is one of three numbers used by the government to refer to schools in the United Kingdom. The Unique Reference Number (URN) is used on Get Information about Schools (GIAS) website. It is a six-digit number allocated sequentially to establishments that are registered on GIAS. These numbers are issued to primary schools, secondary schools and sixth form colleges, both in the state sector and to fee-paying schools.

Get Information about Schools does not issue a URN for early years establishments, but these types of establishment are registered by Ofsted. The Ofsted URNs for childminders and private nurseries are also 6 digits long and some start with EY but some do not. Those with an EY number are newer, as they have been registered since early years became Ofsted’s responsibility, whereas those without the EY number have retained their original URN from before they were part of Ofsted. It is possible for an early years establishment to have the same URN as an unrelated school. URNs are not unique.

Compare with:
 * The Unique Reference Number (URN) used on Get Information about Schools (GIAS) is a six-digit number allocated sequentially to establishments that are registered on GIAS.


 * GIAS does not issue a URN for early years establishments, these types of establishment are registered by Ofsted.


 * Ofsted URNs for childminders and private nurseries are 6 digits long and some start with EY and some do not. Those with an EY number are newer, as they have been registered since early years became Ofsted’s responsibility, whereas those without the EY number have retained their original URN from before they were part of Ofsted.

The United Kingdom Provider Number (UKPRN) is issued by the UK Register of Learning Providers which is a 'one-stop' portal to be used by government departments, agencies, learners, and employers to share key information about learning providers. It is shared across agencies such as the Skills Funding Agency, the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA), the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) and UCAS.

Provider registration started 1 August 2005, and now contains 30,000 providers. Each has been verified against a recognised external source before it was allocated a UK Provider Reference Number (UKPRN). This is the unique identifier.

Is the bolded text Sufficient to trigger a G12. Or does it only get triggered when the article has has a delete tag deleted? To me that was allowable as it was qualified by the next sentence. A further question is that the text was a copuy of a Freedom of Information request, and as such covered by the Open Government Licence so ostensible 'free'.

Whatever, no damage was done only the edit summary was lost, and I'll be wishing to rename the article before it is re-submitted. Any further comments welcome. ClemRutter (talk) 18:21, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The article was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap with https://www.ukrlp.co.uk/ukrlp/ukrlp.first. Investigating, I discovered there was also extensive overlap with https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ofsted_urn_and_dfe_urn, enough that I could not clean the article without destroying it. Hence the deletion nomination. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:43, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Double checking the webpage https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/ofsted_urn_and_dfe_urn, I see the following notice: The information supplied to you continues to be protected by copyright...Any other re-use, for example commercial publication, would require the permission of the copyright holder. So copying from that webpage is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:50, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for trying. Interesting to know that it is word similarity that is being checked not sentence construction. I looked at the bot report and saw a percentage count but no differentiation between fact and creative content! This was a hare I had to chase- and already the discussion has moved on, so I am not following it up- the paper trail we have set up here will suffice. Looking forward to meeting up in person some time. Cheers Clem ClemRutter (talk) 19:53, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:23, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Flagging a CWW article as needing translation attribution
Your opinion would be welcome at WT:CP. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 00:25, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Dorinda Clark-Cole
A new editor has been adding content copied from https://247thesound.com/on-air/dorinda to. I left a uw-copyright-new w/o apparent effect on their talk page. Also, the editor has uploaded three rather blatantly copyrighted images as "Own work" on commons. - File:DCC-1.jpg, File:Dorinda-clarkcole-43.jpg, and File:Dorinda-clarke-cole.jpg I made a deletion request and added a speedy as well to all three. I presume the copyright content should be refdel? Thanks and cheers Jim1138 talk 05:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I've done the revision deletion as well as removed some minor older copyvio. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:12, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Your addition to Charles A. Nelson III has been removed
Hello Diannaa,

Can you please explain why you deleted the material added to this page? You note that it is copyrighted from the following website page (http://www.childrenshospital.org/research/labs/laboratories-of-cognitive-neuroscience/current-research-projects/infant-studies/infant-screening-project). Could you please clarify what exactly was copyrighted from this page? Much of what was added has nothing to do with this particular research study.

KathrynR191 (talk) 17:06, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It wasn't content about the study; it was content that's identical to the biography blurb included with the article. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:16, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Fedora Project
Hi Diannaa,

I've made some changes to Fedora Project page and they were rejected as they "appear to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder". As a contributor to the Fedora Project, I escalated it to the Fedora Project leader, which at the time created a request to add the licensing legends to the Fedora documentation site. It has been updated now and -since that documentation uses exactly the same license than wikipedia- I was wondering if the changes could be brought back.

Thank you --Douglaxmx (talk) 23:22, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for changing the licensing. I have undone the revision deletion but I'm not going to re-add the content. It's got an unencyclopedic tone, and is written like an advertisement. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:28, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

SWGR
Yes its a copy - FROM MY OWN SIDE !!!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Modell240959 (talk • contribs) 01:19, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Regardless of the copyright issue, that content is not appropriate for a disambiguation page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:37, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Sukh Knight
Hi. Not sure about this one, so thought you might take a look at it. It was an uncited blp (which is another issue), which redirected to Shifty (film), since the single from the film had something to do with this producer. Another editor reversed the redirect. However, the content is a clear copy from this source. My issue is that since the original article was written quite a while ago, not sure if this is a mirror or not. I've nominated the article for deletion as it is an uncited blp, but if that ref is not a mirror, than it should be revdel'd. Thanks.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:41, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The source webpage was never archived by the Wayback Machine but this tool shows it had a creation date of 2017-02-21 which pre-dates its addition here. The earlier version of the article from July is different, and was not copied from that source. I am reverting the page back to a redirect and will rev-del the new material. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:21, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

URN
I moved your URN to Ofsted URN ... hope that's okay. Thanks for CopyPatrolling my William Synge :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:29, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Cool cool cool. No worries — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:30, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018
Can you handle a rev/del at Diocesan College for copyvio. Violation Suspected 97.5% confidence via Earwig's Copyvio Detector from this website. Here's the diff where it was added and this diff as well. I left the user a notice on his talk page - User talk:John.k.newton. I deleted the violation manually. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk)  23:17, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
 * All done. Thanks for taking care of this. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:28, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

Mongolia...
... Is it a copyvio? Earwig seems to think so... Eddie891 Talk Work 01:36, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * And Health in Mongolia. Eddie891 Talk Work 01:38, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * An article such as Mongolia will almost invariably be mirrored elsewhere on the web. The article here is dated 18 May 2010, and we already had the overlappting content on that date, so that page copied from us rather than the other way around. The overlapping content from this site is a big quotation. The oldest archived version of this page is dated December 21, 2012, at which point we already had the content, so it's probably a Wikipedia mirror. Even this article in the Guardian copied information from us about the climate.
 * Content in Health in Mongolia was moved there from Mongolia. See the page history. This page is a copy of Mongolia. So no, I don't see any copyright issues with either of these articles after circa 20 minutes of checking. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:17, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

When you have a sec
Could you look at the history at Sony Music.... not sure what should be done.--Moxy (talk) 01:42, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I did some revision deletion and removed the unsourced BLP-violating material. I will watch-list for a while. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:23, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Re: material on Student Environmental Action Coalition
Hi Diannaa. I received a message from you regarding the above noted page. I am not sure which exact passages you refer to as having been copyrighted material. I pulled material out of my personal files - as I was involved in the Student Environmental Action Coalition in the 1990s. Some of this is material I wrote twenty years ago, others I wrote yesterday. Others were from archival SEAC material which is difficult to find on the internet because the organisation has ceased to exist but is available from the Internet Archive project. I am happy to do what is necessary to have the edits meet the right standards. Please let a note on the SEAC page or on my talk page and I can rectify. Pchowla (talk) 14:47, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:19, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Diannaa, given the lack of clarity about who would actually own the copyright for material produced for an organisation that no longer exists, I will re-write the material so that it will not be considered a copyright issue. Pchowla (talk) 21:05, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018 Cheshire Fire
Hey Dianna, this one might be a little tougher, Cheshire Fire and Rescue Service, Earwig says 98% confident from here, I concur, it's a .gov website, but they have a copyright disclaimer. Here's where it gets ugly, I traced it back to June 7, 2011 from a user named Cheshirefire1 (imagine that), who was promptly blocked for his username after a few days (copyvio wasn't detected then), and then this user Triplerv took over in 2011, as you can see a SPA, and then an IP user 194, another SPA worked on it in 2011. From that point forward it's been tweaked and edited by numerous users. I went ahead and removed the offending content, and will leave the rest of this hot mess in your capable hands. Thanks. Isaidnoway (talk)  21:14, 21 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The current version looks okay from a copyright point of view. The folks who added it are no longer editing. I've done some revision deletion and will watch-list for a while. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:32, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! 122.57.49.56 (talk) 02:17, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Help please with copyvio on BT Group article.
Hi Diannaa, I've come here from User talk:Fram, where Fram suggested you may be able to help. The page BT Group which (I think) has an average of >1000 page views per day has been blanked due to a copyvio introduced back in 2010. Having read the copyvio instructions now on the page, I'm not sure wikipedia is going to get license for material that is now only held on a web archive. I have a coi as an (albeit lowly) employee of the company, so can't be directly involved in any effort to re-write the page. Therefore, I wondered if you could please review the situation and let me know what the options are? Thanks, Gricehead (talk) 11:18, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I have cleaned the article by replacing the History section with material adapted from an old revision. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:20, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! Cheers, Gricehead (talk) 16:07, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Regarding Copyright Violation
Diannaa, Regarding the subject of copyright violation, I have initiated a Dispute Resolution. Please visit the Dispute Resolution Notice Board, and provide a statement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#User_talk:MichaelPeiper0331

Thank you, Michael — Preceding unsigned comment added by MichaelPeiper0331 (talk • contribs) 00:21, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Changed visibility of 57 revisions on page European Museum of the Year Award
Hi. Correct your change of visibility, please. The first ,,Criterion for redaction" is ,,Blatant violations of the copyright policy that can be redacted without removing attribution to non-infringing contributors. If redacting a revision would remove any contributor's attribution, this criterion cannot be used." After the change of visibility a lot of text (4.3 kB from 10.6) in the current form can't be attributed. Here is diff with changes over the 57 in row hidden edits. PawełS (talk) 13:19, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi PawełS. That's the way we normally do it. Contributions are not removed, only hidden, so the attribution is still present, but is only visible to admins. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:44, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * 1. This way Revision deletion doesn't delete anything because everything is visible to admins. But, O.K. it seems to me not every letter has to be attributable to the specific author.
 * 2. This way every edit could be hidden be a bot, but ,,Log redaction (outside of the limited scope of RD#2 for the move and delete logs) is intended solely for grossly improper content, and is not permitted for ordinary matters." I can bet that first hidden edit from 11:15, 24 June 2012‎ reducing the article by 71 bytes didn't introduce any ,,blatant violations of the copyright policy". I think it is the same with subsequent edits with small effects on the article size. First big hidden edits are by User Timbouctou in May 2015. They increased the article by 1.7 kB, but he was an experienced user, and so on. PawełS (talk) 17:12, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Revdel Question
Hi Diannaa, I ran across a reverted text dump of an article on a blocked user's talk page here. Is that something that should be deleted from the history? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 19:30, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Bilcat. It's a copy of a Wikipedia article, unattributed copying, which is a violation of the terms of the license but not a copyright violation per se. So no need to do revision deletion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:27, 23 November 2018 (UTC)


 * OK,thanks. I just wasn't sure, so I asked. :) - BilCat (talk) 21:29, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Backwards copy involving Fenwick High School
Hello Diannaa, I think I've found a backwards copy. There are word-for-word common elements between Fenwick High School (Oak Park, Illinois) (sections: History, Chapel, and Notable alumni/ae) and https://www.fenwickfriars.com/about/school-history/. It appears material has been copied from Wikipedia to the school website without attribution. For example the text "In 1983 Fenwick was selected by the U.S. Department of Education as a Blue Ribbon School.[8] On January 18, 1999, U.S. News & World Report classified Fenwick as an "Outstanding American High School", making Fenwick tied for the #1 ranked preparatory school in the Chicago area." was added to the Wikipedia article at 19:33 on 30 May 2007. It is now present in the school website history page although it wasn't there 01 April 2017 (https://web.archive.org/web/20170401072721/http://www.fenwickfriars.com:80/about/school-history/). Beyond me what to do... so I pass it to you. Gab4gab (talk) 20:09, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * There's a template that can be placed on the article talk page that notes the backwards-copy. I will do that now. Fun fact: the school history page used to live at http://www.fenwickfriars.com:80/domain/207 up until around October 2016, but we didn't copy from that version either. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk)
 * Thanks, I did wonder why there were no archives earlier than 2016. I've added Backwards copy to my list of useful templates. Gab4gab (talk) 16:16, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyright Dispute at DRN
Please take a look at the comments of MichaelPeiper0331 at DRN with regard to the copyright issue. I have no idea why he is engaging in personal attacks on you and me. I think that he needs a warning from someone who has a block button (even though you may now consider yourself involved, but I don't think he understands that much). Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:15, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I have undone the revision deletion, so my part in the matter is closed, so no, I have no intention of going back and reading whatever foul things he had to say. Thanks anyway, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:29, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem on 2018 Kansas State Wildcats football team
Thanks for your edits and concern at 2018 Kansas State Wildcats football team. Copyright is a serious issue and it's never my intent to violate that or any other Wikipedia policy. The problem is I've reviewed the changes and I just don't see it. There are partial phrases (such as "Kansas State held them without a touchdown") but no complete sentences. I believe that editing would have been a better solution than deletion of the content.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:17, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Here's the content I removed: . This material appears in several sources online as it was a story published by the Associated Press. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:00, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I've searched the sources you provided and the web in general. It's similar, but it's not exact.  But I can re-edit based on what you provided in the dif.--Paul McDonald (talk) 20:04, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Charles E. Myers
Hi Diannaa, could you check out Charles E. Myers? Much, if not most, of it appears to be lifted directly from here, which is a copyrighted site. Thanks again. :) - BilCat (talk) 19:26, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Lotsa times military biographies have as their ultimate source a US Government webpage, but that doesn't seem to be the case here. I've removed the overlapping content. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:10, 24 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and I understand. In this case, the original contributor appears to have been the actual author of the POGO article. - BilCat (talk) 20:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I have a related question regarding using PD text: Does Wikipedia discourage using copyright-free and public-domain text without major modifications, even with proper attribution? I understand using free text without attribution is generally considered to be plagiarism, but where exactly does Wikipedia stand on the issue? I also realize in many cases the text is not encyclopedic in style, and would require rewriting anyway. Is rephrasing "in one's own words" recommended in most cases, no matter the copyright status of the source? Thanks. - BilCat (talk) 20:23, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Compatibly licensed text is okay to use as long as it's properly attributed. It's not necessarily written in an encyclopedic style though, and we will often need to copy edit the prose to meet our standards. If it is a suitable style (for example from NASA) it's okay to import in unaltered assuming it's properly attributed. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:04, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Moving content
This template seems to do what is required. Template:Copied Unlike entries on the history it should remain visible.Rathfelder (talk) 22:53, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The template is okay but the edit summary is what is recommended at Copying within Wikipedia. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 05:21, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Actually, re-reading the page more closely, I see that both methods are currently considered okay. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:43, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Some violations
I have dealt with some violation cases recently. Would you please see, if I'm doing them well? Btw, following your warning and this "gentle warning", also by you, the user is not still respecting Copyright rules. I hid a violation case, a text in the first paragraph of the lead which was copied verbatim, with my edit summary referring to Non free content and asking for a rewrite. However, the user reinserted the copied text without saying why. I hid it again, and opened a talk page discussion referring to Non free content, but the user responded as if the violation was my personal issue and that I myself had to resolve the copyright problem. Moreover, he tends to add mass amounts of verbatim texts from sources into the talk page (see and ), without using quotation marks. -- M h hossein   talk 07:41, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * @Diannaa, this may provide some more info about Mhhossein's complaint against me. Regards. Stefka Bulgaria (talk) 12:33, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * This is just some sort of victim playing aimed at deflecting our views from your daily violations (You see, the only user supported you is a less than 5 months user who have received multiple warnings and a block). @Diannaa: Would you please take a look at the above diffs? Thanks. -- M h hossein   talk 18:30, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I had a quick look and it's fairly short quotations, not a violation of the copyright policy or the fair use guideline. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:27, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the feedback. Are same rules governing in talk pages? -- M h hossein   talk 05:30, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:10, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you again. So, these edits ( and ) are inserting copyright violations into the article talk page, as far as I know. -- M h hossein   talk 16:54, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No. These are quotations, and are marked as such. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:39, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I think you need to give it a deeper review. See how those whole paragraphs (coming with this edit) are copied word by word from sources as such, . Are these parts properly marked? I don't think so. Please note that, the portions in question are neither reworded nor accompanied by quotation marks. The quotation marks you see in various parts of the texts are those used by the original authors of the contents while the other parts are just copied and pasted here word by word, without being altered. Same is true for the the 6 paragraphs copied from the Bloomfield Jr.’s report. Am I wrong? -- M h hossein   talk 05:34, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you please give it a look?-- M h hossein   talk 06:56, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The green font is used on this wiki to indicate a quotation. I suggest you fix it yourself by adding quotation marks if you think it's necessary. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:17, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. If the green font is resolving the issue, why should I add the quotes? Regards. -- M h hossein   talk 17:00, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Regarding your last talk on my page
Hi, thank you for your notice for Le Quyen's wikipedia. However, I don't see translating from one page to another page of another language is violated or illegal - in this case you've accused me of translating Vietnamese to English? I think, as long as they're totally approved in the original Vietnamese page then I don't think it's been violating any rule here as all the info in the original (Vietnamese) has been already APPROVED. Please make sure your revision is correct before giving accusation as many have been working on these kind of things and I don't see any rule setting that you're not allowed to translate (if there is, ever, please provide me to prove that I'm wrong and I will apologize). Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilcuriouspeep (talk • contribs)
 * Hello Lilcuriouspeep. Sorry you found my note accusatory or offensive. That was not my intent. When we copy from one Wikipedia article to another or from (for example) Vietnamese wiki to English wiki, we're supposed to say so. Otherwise people might think you wrote the material yourself rather than copied it. Also, specifying that the material was copied is a way to provide attribution to the original authors. In fact such attribution is required by the terms of our license. Please see WP:Copying within Wikipedia for more information. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:31, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, I will look into that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lilcuriouspeep (talk • contribs) 15:07, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

Sonic Boom of the South
Hi Diannaa. Would you mind checking this for any copyvios? I did a bit of cleanup to remove some unsourced puffery, etc., but I have sinking feeling that most of the content (at least most of the recent content added) was simply copied-and-paste from some external website. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:38, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Potential COPYVIO Lord Nelson Hotel, Millers Point
Hi Diannaa,

Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of copyright content in Lord Nelson Hotel, Millers Point. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 13:40, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

✅ I removed the copyvio materials and tagged it with rev-del. -- M h hossein   talk 17:15, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * After a deeper check, the mentioned source is published under CC BY 4.0. I'm waiting for Diannaa's reaction which will have instruction points for me. --  M h hossein   talk 17:19, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

The material is released under a compatible license, and the person who imported it properly attributed it as well right from the beginning. Please see the attribution at the bottom of the article. Revision deletion declined, and I have restored the missing material. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:45, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I just checked the license after the removal, which I had to perform before anything else. -- M h hossein   talk 05:35, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

African-American Vernacular English and education
Hey Diannaa, I saw that you marked some content at African-American Vernacular English and education as in the public domain. I ended up removing it since my copyvio report showed that they'd also used material from some sources that looked to be copyrighted or at the very least, weren't marked as CC-BY or similar. I just wanted to let you know that I'm going to remove the revisions, just in case you were wondering what happened. Thank you for looking out for this stuff! Shalor (Wiki Ed) (talk) 15:59, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Repeated copyright violations by User:Sid54126 on Amreshwar Pratap Sahi
Hello. On 16 November you removed copyrighted material from the article, but three days later the same editor who made the first copyvio, Sid54126 (who has been very disruptive on many articles related to India, see messages on their talk page, enough to deserve an indef by now...), added the same copyrighted material back again, clearly showing they have no intention of abiding by the rules here. So would you mind hiding it? Cheers, - Tom &#124; Thomas.W talk 20:59, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Revision deletion done. Thank you for issuing the final warning, that's exactly what's needed at this point. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:16, 26 November 2018 (UTC)

Question
Hi Diannaa. I thought that the book would be old enough to be in public domain, but after some reflecting I agree that my belief is probably wrong.

Please can you give me access to the article (List of riots in India) (perhaps on my usertalkpage) for 24 hours? Or can you please email it to me? Thank you. --Agafoklea23 (talk) 23:33, 26 November 2018 (UTC)


 * About the content itself: It is from Ambedkar, who himself is quoting extensively from annual year books (1920 to 1940) of the Government of India. (see footnote 1 here ). The copyright for government sources expires 60 years after publication (expired by now), while that for Ambedkar himself is probably still in copyright.


 * I don't see how adding only the incidents themselves to the table (years, location) would be a problem. But I agree that I added too many quotes in the 'Cause' and 'Damage' columns. I will not repeat this. If you could please restore the content without the two problematic columns, I am very thankful. --Agafoklea23 (talk) 00:07, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * While the copyright has expired in India our servers are located in the United States, so US copyright also applies. I am sending you the deleted material via email. Please don't re-add it without thoroughly paraphrasing the descriptions, which were exact copies from the source document. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:12, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you :) --Agafoklea23 (talk) 15:10, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Message from Laurencalebmariah
Hi Diana, I am currently a college student and my group members and I have to edit the page shame for our project with information we have found. We have to submit it by 11:59p.m. I was wondering if you could refrain from removing our content unless it is in direct violation of wikipedia. We have looked at your comments and are improving our information from them, but if you could wait to remove our information if you really don't like it for maybe a week so our professor can see the information we found. Thank you!

Laurencalebmariah (talk) 04:33, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * I mentioned on my edit summaries what Wikipedia policies are being violated: our rules abut non-free content, original research, and copyright. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 04:39, 28 November 2018 (UTC)

Please give me a short extension on MarcLevoy-Dec14.jpg
I can easily get you an email of permission from the photographer Florian Kainz. However, he is on vacation until 12/3. Therefore, please grant me a second week before you delete that profile picture that appears in the infobox on this page Marc Levoy — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcLevoy (talk • contribs) 02:59, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello. The file can easily be restored when the permission email arrives. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:51, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Toy Factory Productions Copyright Comment
Hi Diannaa, this is TFPSG and I am enquiring a comment you left on Draft of Toy Factory Productions Ltd. I am new to contributing to articles on Wikipedia so I hope you can be patient with me. You mentioned that the reason behind the removal of material is due to them appearing to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder.

As the article is about Toy Factory Productions and its various theatrical works, I have paraphrased and wrote the article in my own words and presented the various references I have taken them from.

Also, if I have direct access to the information of the synopses and it is allowed by the company for me to include in the article, how should I proceed with this? Do I donate my material to Wikipedia? Will that be enough to solve the issue?

TFPSG (talk) 04:37, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:51, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Sigmund Freud
Hi Diannaa. I think there may be the need to rev del a recent addition to this article. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 14:57, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Two recent additions - revision deletion complete. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:02, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. I guess you must dream about copyvio. Or perhaps they're all nightmares? Martinevans123 (talk) 15:11, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, nightmares more like :/ — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:12, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Expungment Iowa Update
Hi Diannaa, I got notification regarding my post earlier which added information to the US Expungment Document. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expungement_in_the_United_States - The information which I updated and cited was not copyrighted and is widely cited and published across many places. The language I used was consistent with the citation but the overall post was different than what was referenced.

Instead of simply taking the post down you should have altered to to meet the criteria, which in this sitaution you made a subjective judgment call.

If you want folks to contribute and be part of the community you definitely need to help people along.
 * It doesn't matter how many places material has been copied or reproduced; that doesn't have any impact on its copyright status. Sorry, while I do occasionally paraphrase the copyvio material myself, given the volume of copyvio reports that are filed each day and the amount of time it takes to assess and clean the articles and notify and/or discuss with the editors involved, it's not possible for me to perform re-writes in each instance. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:13, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

This is completely rediculous and overly zealous policing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomers please restore my changes and/or have a third party review. Your arbitrary decision is completely off base and does not benefit the article or the public. My second revision was well within the bounds of any sort of normal research citation.

I'm also going to follow up with Iowa Legal Aid to seek copyright release. I'd like to have this issue escalated within Wikipedia for independent third party review.

User 86.179.179.77 using fowl language
I have had user 86.179.179.77 leaving comments on my user talk page with fowl language in the edit comment. "Don't be a c**t mate" Also looks like he is troubled by me in some way as he has only left rather meaningless comments on my talk page and not on any other pages. As an admin is this something you can deal with e.g. block him or her please? Simuliid  talk  02:42, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The activity has stopped and someone else has already issued a warning. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:09, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Laurie Scott Baker
Brigid Scott Baker, the author of www.composer.co.uk/composers/baker.html, has emailed permission to use the material on that web page to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. You also mentioned modification to have an encyclopedic tone. Can you give me examples of what needs changing?

AndyScott (talk) 10:03, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * The comment about unencyclopedic tone is part of the generic template that I placed on your talk page. It doesn't appear to apply to this particular case. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:10, 30 November 2018 (UTC)

Redirect/Deletion of Robert L. Tillman School of Business
you deleted the page Robert L. Tillman School of Business. Can you explain to me how what was there does not constitute fair use? The reviewer of this page did not give any insight as to why they flagged the page for speedy deletion, which I contested, given that the content in the article was 1.) attributed to the citation, 2.) was generic language, and that which was used was limited in scope (i.e. de minimus), 3.) the language was not an original creative work, it was a statement of a fact with few, if any other ways of phrasing it, and 4.) the information utilized provide a benefit to the public. The information was stating that the subject of the article has certifications. Perhaps, I am mistaken, but should the article not have had a notation and discussion on the talk page prior to the reviewer flagging it for speedy deletion, since the content likely meets fair use criteria? Thanks for your input. If you disagree with this assessment. I can rewrite text on the article, but I'm really surprised that this wouldn't meet fair use and that the page deletion was handled in this way. Cc09091986 (talk) 23:25, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. You must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. I redirected the article to the parent university because while the School of Business is not notable enough as Wikipedia defines it to qualify for an article, it's a valid useful redirect as a search term people might use. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:45, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
 * , thank you for clarifying, and I appreciate you redirecting rather than deleting. My plan was to expand on this article, but it was flagged for deletion before I could do anything with it. That particular University has an archives of primary sources. My plan was do to the research to build out this and other pages on that institutions Academic Organization. Should I sandbox this content until I have a more robust article with the necessary citations and then petition to have the redirect removed? Just need a little more guidance... thanks.
 * I suggest you write it in draft space using the Articles for Creation process. Don't copy anything from the school website; to do so is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:01, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Translation which might be lacking attribution
Hi Diannaa. Would you mind taking a peek at Special:diff/UnderdogBull/871469463? The edit was made by a "new" editor and the edit sum mentions it's a translation. The source article isn't specifically mentioned by name, but I'm wondering if that can be remedied just by adding a Translated page to the article's talk page. I'm assume "corresponding article" refers to pt:Jean Wyllys. One other concern I have is about the nature of the content since I'm not sure whether Portuguese Wikipedia is as vigorous as English Wikipedia is about the BLP and RS stuff and all of the sources cited are in Portuguese. On a side note, this account was created just today and from the get go makes some edits which are not typical of a true newbie. Some of the articles edited have recently be the subjects of some socking and edit warring, and I'm not quite sure whether this account may be connected to any of that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:53, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I am sure the added content was translated from the Portuguese wiki, so I've gone ahead and added the template to the talk page. I don't know what to do about your other two questions,. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking on translation part of this. The the other two questions have been resolved as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:06, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

Message from Durrani khurasan
Tnx to you and im wishing that you could help because what thing im edditting is on several pages of wikipedia and other websites so im going to add full reference and you can help me there so can check my edits there with references and easy way to understand Durrani khurasan (talk) 11:21, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

I just want the correct information for viewers. By this they will easy understand an article they will get all information from one page in a easy way Durrani khurasan (talk) 11:25, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Please don't copy material that you find on other websites. It is almost always copyright, and cannot be copied here; it's against the copyright policy of this website to do so. All prose must be written in your own words. The Wikipedia copyright policy and its application are complex matters, and you should not edit any more until you have taken the time to read and understand our copyright policy. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:48, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

HMS Acanthus
This was created with all the prose copied from https://uboat.net/allies/warships/ship/4705.html. The copyvio has been removed from the article. If you could do the necessary please Lyndaship (talk) 09:24, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The same editor has now done the same on HMS Airedale (L07) Lyndaship (talk) 11:42, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. Thank you, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:21, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright.
Dear Diannaa, thank you for your advice and corrections.

First of all,I would like to know the following questions from you:

1) in my corrections there are only copyright mistakes, which should be corerect by quotation marks ? 2) Are there any errors in the design? Can I make corrections in visual editing mode and not search engine? 3) What is the minimum number of words and edits I can make?

Waiting gor your answear Regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Annmorgan24 (talk • contribs)
 * Hello Annmorgan24. Your additions should not contain any prose copied from your sources. Don't use quotations; that's not a good way to build Wikipedia articles. Everything you add to Wikipedia needs to be written in your own words. I don't know how to answer questions #2 and 3, because I'm not sure what you are asking or why. I think there may be a language barrier. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:05, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Sentinelese
Hi Diannaa, regarding your deletion of text here for violating copyright, since you have access to the source would you be so kind as to summarise it where it is no longer too closely paraphrased? I think the loss of this content harms the article, but I certainly understand why you deleted the content.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  17:38, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The content is available here. You don't need Jstor access to see it. Since I've not yet done revision deletion, the overlap can be viewed using Earwig's tool. Here. I've gone back and removed a little more that I missed the first time around. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:51, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks, I have fixed it, I think. The only thing I did not change was this: "peculiarly idiotic expression of countenance, and manner of behaving" for the simple reason it was attributed in our article to the source using quotes number 1 and number 2 because the source itself had put the same phrase in quotes. It is a direct quote of someone who was alive at the time and involved rather than an authors original thoughts.-- Literaturegeek |  T@1k?  18:43, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That's super-great for WP:NPOV that we copy that in uncritically! Thanks! Elizium23 (talk) 19:30, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * And, what's exactly the problem in this edit? Check the edit summary. &#x222F; WBG converse 19:32, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Mk. IV LCU
There is some copyvio remaining from the article creation in 2015 and subsequently other edits have added more copyvio. I think every sentence in the history and design sections has been copied from one or other of the sources quoted. It would appear the creator who is now a well respected editor did not understand the rules then as a quick look at all his early article creations show a similar pattern of copyvio Lyndaship (talk) 18:43, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Cleaned. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:12, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Nominations now open for "Military historian of the year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" awards
Nominations for our annual Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards are open until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2018. Why don't you nominate the editors who you believe have made a real difference to the project in 2018? MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:26, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

your edit on Henry Molaison
Good morning, Diannaa. Re your edit on Henry Molaison I am sorry if you felt it was too closely paraphrased to - great that you check. However, I am an experienced user as you may know, and I am dead certain that I did way more than add material that was too closely paraphrased over a period of 43 minutes. I cant remember all that I did, because you deleted everything.

I worked on the page to improve it, so give me a chance and let me redo the edits, for WP sake ! The Henry Molaison page is imbalanced and poorly written as it is now.I cant work on the edits because you disappeared them. Lastly, slapping the preprinted note of copyright infringement on the page of an experienced user, is poor form. You can talk to me. --Wuerzele (talk) 14:55, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. I can send you the removed material via email if you like, or you can recover it from the iThenticate report. I typically use a template rather than a hand-written note if I have already used a hand-written note about violations of the copyright policy in the past. You received such a note in July 2017. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Antarctic Subglacial Lakes
Hi Diannaa,

You recently edited my Antarctic Subglacial Lakes page. To prove permission from a copyright holder, what evidence does Wikipedia need and where does it need to be submitted? Thanks Arielwaldman (talk) 17:00, 3 December 2018 (UTC)Ariel
 * Hi Arielwaldman. As you have gathered, Wikipedia needs to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website. We have procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:02, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

About deletion of a page
Hello Diannaa, I created a page Medicine Club which was deleted by you. But I think there should be a content about this. It is a voluntary organization which is directed by meical studets of Bangladesh. You know Bangladesh is a developing country where a lot of people is out of proper health care. So, here medical students created platform like Medicine Club to aware about many health issues like blood donation,Thalassemia, Antibiotic misuse etc. So please help to create a content about it by giving some advise that how I can create a content about Medicine Club properly. As I'm a new content creator, help me as much as you can. I'll be grateful to you. I've already created a draft about this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sifat Amin (talk • contribs) 15:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. I have removed some of the material from the draft for this reason.The second problem is that the organization is not considered notable enough (as Wikipedia defines it) for an article, and was deleted as the result of a deletion discussion. Articles for deletion/Medicine Club. I therefore cannot restore the article. Please see Deletion review if you wish to pursue this matter further. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:10, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Deleted my entire sandbox
Hi Diannaa, I was working on some projects in my Sandbox, both related to the Allied Media Projects article you slapped a copyright violation on, and on an unrelated other project where I was playing with Wikipedia's chart template for use on another wiki. I just noticed that you deleted everything in the sandbox, including the chart. I think some new edits to the chart were made since the last accessible version, but I can't remember and now am unable to check. Can you restore it?

Mayawagon (talk) 17:16, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Mayawagon. I've restored a version that does not contain the Allied Media content. Sorry, my mistake, I thought you would know how to find it yourself since that version was not hidden. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:49, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Second National Front of Escambray
Hi, Diannaa - I checked some of the other paragraphs in that article in addition to the one you verified as a copyvio, and considering the copyvios are so blatant, I'm of the mind it's a G12. Another reviewer tagged it for investigation of potential issues. Is there another process I'm skipping here? Atsme ✍🏻📧 17:52, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The page was listed at WP:CP on October 23, 2018‎. Pages are listed for a minimum of seven days to give editors a chance to do a re-write if they are interested. This one was listed considerably longer than that... Unfortunately the page is quite backlogged right now, with circa 50 listings, each of which will take interested editors quite some time to process and clean. I've gone ahead and done this one. Sorry for the delay. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:24, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

About the Nixtun Ch'ich' Page
Hi, you recently said that my copyright is not up to standard, however, I work for the copyright holder and all the photos are original and his. do I still need to get the copyright license for all the photos and the paragraphs I used from the website? Wikigwz (talk) 21:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
 * We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. For copyright photos deleted from the Commons, please provide evidence of permission by either providing a link to a site with an explicit release under a free license or by sending a declaration of consent to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org. There's full instructions at Commons:OTRS. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:38, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Elizabeth L. Gardner
Hi Diannaa. I think a revdel might be needed here since most of the content was copied-and-pasted from a blog. I removed the questionable content and did some other minor cleanup afterwards, so hopefully I didn't make things worse. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:40, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Marchjuly. I am not going to do revision deletion as the removed material is marked as being a quotation. You were right to remove it though; that's not how we build articles. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:31, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
 * OK. Thanks for clarifying that. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:42, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

William Wilberforce
Hi Diannaa. I see you had some issues with some of my entries to the William Wilberforce article, and removed them. Because it was done in passing, I can't remember and can't discern exactly what entries you had issues with. Could you enlighten me? Was it anything to do with Heyrick's criticism of Wilberforce? Anything else? User talk:Mikesiva
 * Hello Mikesiva. I removed the content because it appears to have been copied http://www.nednewitt.com/whoswho/H.html. Copying text directly from a source is a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, for copyright reasons, the content had to be removed. Content you add to Wikipedia should be written in your own words. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 11:33, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa. Was it? I just copied it from the Wikipedia page on Elizabeth Heyrick, which I assumed was okay. Apparently not....So, is the Heyrick issue the only problem you had? Was there any other content that had been removed? I can't recall, to be frank. If I find a source other than Wikipedia to put in a sentence about Heyrick, would that be okay? Because it's well-known in historical circles that Heyrick criticised Wilberforce and Clarkson for their stance on gradual emancipation. User talk:Mikesiva
 * Sorry for the mistake. I looked for the content in other Wikipedia articles but couldn't find it. What you are supposed to do when copying from one Wikipedia article to another is to say so in your edit summary, and say where you got it. In fact such attribution is required under the terms of our CC-by-SA license. Here's a sample edit summary: . I've undone the revision deletion, but I've not re-added the removed material, since it's unsourced. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:10, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, Diannaa. I will now make adjustments to the sentences about Heyrick, in both the Wikipedia article about Heyrick, and the Wikipedia article on Wilberforce, quoting directly from Heyrick's 1824 pamphlet, which is better than any online source. I hope that won't get me into trouble with regards to what they call "edit wars" or anything like that. Was there anything else that I put in the WIlberforce article that was removed? I truly can't remember. User talk:Mikesiva
 * You can find out by checking the page history. Click on the tab "View history" and you can see the changes made in each individual edit. There's more on this topic at Help:Diff — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:24, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, Dianna. I was able to use the history, and I found that the only issue was the quote from Heyrick. I've since re-written the entry in Elizabeth Heyrick and William Wilberforce with reference specifically to the primary source material. User talk:Mikesiva

Draft:AstraChat
Hi Diannaa, I just finished my draft that i made for AstraChat few hours ago and then I received your message that the version history both iOS and Android were deleted. I already put all of the references and have the permission from the CEO of AstraChat. Is there anything we can do to resolve this? Thank you Iwanindraprasto 19:11, 6 December 2018 (PST)
 * We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:15, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Public Hospitals Authority
Can you tell me what I added which you considered a breach of copyright please? Rathfelder (talk) 18:22, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:59, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

Surely this content produced by the Government of the Bahamas is Public domain? It certainly is in most countries?Rathfelder (talk) 13:21, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * While government works are PD (for example) in the United States and the Philippines, they are not in the public domain in most countries. I have checked and double checked and found nothing to indicate that this specific material is in the public domain, in fact I found the opposite. The source document http://www.corp.phabahamas.org/about is marked at the bottom as © 2018 All Rights Reserved. So this particular document is copyright and is clearly marked as such. The documentation at the Commons (commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Bahamas) states that "There is copyright protection for every work which is eligible for copyright and which is made by or under the direction or control of the Government.[7]". — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:35, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Looking at the match, most of it is matching statutory terms and the names of agencies which the Authority manages, and which I plan to write articles about. The words " management and development of the public hospital system in the Commonwealth of The Bahamas" appear to define its statutory function. Using different words would be misleading. Surely I am not expected to paraphrase the names of the agencies? I dont think it it appropriate for you to issue a final warning in these circumstances. I would be very happy if you could point me to guidance about how to tackle this difficultyRathfelder (talk) 14:37, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. If you can't figure out how to paraphrase it without violating the copyright policy, don't include it. One thing I find that works for me is to read over the source material and then pretend I am verbally describing the topic to a friend in my own words. Stuff should also be presented in a different order where possible. Summarize rather than paraphrase. This will typically result in your version being much shorter than the source document. There's some reading material on this topic at Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing and/or have a look at the material at Purdue or study this module aimed at WikiEd students. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:39, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

None of these seem to deal with these issues. It's not Wikipedia policy that we should paraphrase the names of organisations. Is it? And the guidance says, rather unhelpfully "In many (but not all) countries, documents published by the government for official use are in the public domain." - but says nothing about the Bahamas. Rathfelder (talk) 15:31, 8 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I did not say you were required to paraphrase the names of organizations. Please look at the specific page I already linked to view the Bahamian law. Please look at the specific webpage you copied and note the copyright notice at the bottom. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:31, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Most of what I copied was the names of these organizations. You say we must not include any wording from the source material. I am not denying that the page is copyright. The question is what constitutes fair use in this context. Rathfelder (talk) 22:46, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. You must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:48, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Of the 92 words compared about thirty were the names of the various organisations which you accept are legitimate to use and about 10 were prepositions. 76% of the 92 words matched. Some of the others were technical terms like Board of Directors, Local Health System,  and Public Corporation.  I dont think it is legitimate to use other words for them.  If you think this breached the policy I am happy to take your advice and try harder in future.   But I dont think it is fair to give me a final warning on the basis of this difficult exercise. Rathfelder (talk) 23:00, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Please reinstate my profile picture:
My profile picture: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:MarcLevoy-Dec14.jpg&action=edit&redlink=1 was deleted for lack of a license file. However, I emailed permissions-en@wikimedia.org with an email from the photographer giving me permission to use his photograph of me. I sent this email on Dec. 3. It is reproduced below. I thought this would suffice. What else is needed? If you need the photograph again, to restore it, please email me, levoy@cs.stanford.edu or levoy@google.com

Email:

Marc Levoy  Mon, Dec 3, 11:27 PM (5 days ago) to permissions-en

Marc Levoy Distinguished Engineer [Googler] Machine Intelligence levoy@google.com US-MTV-1875-1-1D1C levoy 2011-06 +1 650-253-6441 [Hide] I believe this should satisfy your licensing requirements for this picture, as explained to me in the "File permission problem" entry at the bottom of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MarcLevoy?markasread=150498767&markasreadwiki=enwiki#File_permission_problem_with_File:MarcLevoy-Dec14.jpg

-Marc Levoy Distinguished Engineer Google Research

-- Forwarded message - From: Florian Kainz  Date: Sat, Dec 1, 2018 at 3:53 PM Subject: Re: Permission to use your Xmas party photo of me To: Marc Levoy 

Sure, feel free to use the picture on Wikipedia.

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 12:17 PM Marc Levoy  wrote: Florian,

I switched the photo on my "Marc Levoy" Wikipedia page (which BTW I did not create, but have kept up to date) to your photo of me from the 2014 Xmas party. The photo is attached for reference. Wikipedia is asking for an email proving that you allow me to use the photo for this purpose. Responding to this email with a Yes (assuming you allow it) would probably suffice for their purposes.

-Marc — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarcLevoy (talk • contribs) 08:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Dianna. Same question was asked at User talk:Explicit and I've responded there. I've also added Template:OTRS pending to the file's page even though it seems that the email is not going to be sufficient. Regardless, the file is still lacking a copyright license and I'm not an OTRS volunteer so I can't check the email to see which one should be added. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:07, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * But why aren't you an OTRS volunteer, ? – I'm sure you'd be a very good one. Anyway, we don't accept forwarded permissions, permission needs to come from the photographer unless it can be shown that copyright has been transferred. Oh, and hi, Diannaa! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Oh hi :) — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:34, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you and  for your help resolving this minor permissions issue. The photographer Florian Kainz has uploaded a new version of this photograph, hopefully specified the appropriate permissions, and changed the link in the infobox of the article about me. TBH both of us are Wikipedia noobs. I contributed a number of pages to Wikipedia, but that was years ago. I added a few more comments to this talk page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Explicit#Thanks_for_all_the_help_on_the_page_about_Marc_Levoy Sorry again for all the trouble. MarcLevoy (talk) 22:30, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

can you search on google for "Dhruv Rathee" and give me your opinion
I was trying to create this article but some editors says he is not a notable person. Hope you will help. Iamskylord (talk) 17:16, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry I don't have time to help with this. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:34, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

Copyright issues
Hi. I have noticed that you removed some content from history at Visa requirements for Sri Lankan citizens. Please check if this content matches the same content that is being added in mass edits by the same user to dozens of other articles. Thanks.--Twofortnights (talk) 23:02, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I did some spot checks and found nothing further. Many of the edits have already been reverted or removed. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:11, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

HMS Sportsman
I have rewritten a section copied from http://www.harwichanddovercourt.co.uk/submarines-wwii/ could you do the necessary revdel please? Earwig also shows a large hit ,from Uboat.net but although there's a couple of phrases clearly copied the majority of the "copied" relates to Geographical places, ship names and occurrences which cannot be detailed any other way so I think no copy edit is necessary Lyndaship (talk) 09:48, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Revision deletion complete. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:03, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

MyNation Hope Foundation

 * Hi Diannaa, you left a msg on my talk page Hello Rudy3107, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to MyNation Hope Foundation have been removed, becoz of copy right issue. I AM NOT SURE WHICH TOPIC YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT AND WHAT YOU HAVE REMOVED. AS NONE OF THE CONTENT ON MYNATION IS COPY RIGHTED. NOTHING IS LINKED OR ADDED WHICH IS NOT BELONG TO US.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rudy3107 (talk • contribs) 14:56, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your interest in working on Wikipedia. There are a couple of problems with your submission. You cannot post copyright material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. That is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, and all content must have the appropriate documentation in place before that can happen. Please see donating copyrighted materials which explains how it works.The second problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organisation or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view. According to our terms of use, paid editors and people editing on behalf of their employer are required to disclose their conflict of interest by posting a notice on their user page or talk page. I have placed some information about conflict of interest on your user talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:10, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Im newbie to Wikipedia just trying to understand and learning. Thank you very much for taking time to guide me about Copyrights, as everything is on mynation is a contribution from its members, nothing is copied as my knowledge, as there are more than 7000 members as per NGO, its difficult to trace who did what. Shukria 498A_Crusader (talk) 15:27, 10 December 2018 (UTC) Rudy
 * Under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright and can't be copied to Wikipedia. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:12, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

Copyright ?
I understand this 100 % (I was a strong fighter for the copyright issue in wikipedia -see my german discussion side) but the press statement is more or less an open source UN document without any copyright (until you citate the source correctly !) Specially in the context it is even necessary to use the "UN words". I´m offically for Wikimedia Germany at the conference - the text was exactly verbal communicated on the press conference. There was no copyright on the paper. What you suggest - shall I ask the UN for admission ? For me it`s enough to care for the german version....please care for this important articel ! --Empiricus-sextus (talk) 18:16, 10 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Replied on your talk page. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:08, 10 December 2018 (UTC)

I spoke with Louise Arbour personally - she can`t understand the problem. Also my sentences in the artikel were direkt from the press conference - the paper was publised one day later. This was at least a offical statement -also against many fake news - concerning the compact - in UN languages and with UN terms. To transform this statement in new words - will produce new fake news ! Louise Arbour told me that Wikipedia is full of a lot wrong information - even fake news, specially concern migration. She give me the right to use her statement and words in WP. I don´t understand the global copyright issuse - in this special case it`s maybe a case for the Wikimedia Foundation and their advocates.--Empiricus-sextus (talk) 09:39, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry but if you're unable to add the content without violating our copyright policy, you won't be able to add it. I'm not in a position to grant you an exception — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:58, 11 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Sorry, but I think that you don´t understand the specifications of the various copyright systems - specially the UN ! I had the permission to use Ms Arbour speech! Where is the problem ? Copyright is not copyright - Germany is different from the US, and also the UN is different, and maybe there are specification for this intergovermental conference (at least we have to look on the national copyrights of the speakers (because in the rules of the conference I could´nt find any information for this...). Which copyright system you take for your delete decision ?--Empiricus-sextus (talk) 17:31, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * In the US copyright, documents without explizit copyright statement / symbol are without copyright - there is no document of the conference with explizit copyright symbol ! --Empiricus-sextus (talk) 17:33, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. The UN webpages are copyright, according to their copyright page: "COPYRIGHT © UNITED NATIONS All rights reserved. None of the materials provided on this web site may be used, reproduced or transmitted, in whole or in part..." so you're not allowed to copy their material to Wikipedia. Everything you add to Wikipedia needs to be written in your own words please. The rules that govern Wikipedia and copyright are laid down in our copyright policy. Please read it and let me know if there's any parts you have questions about. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:53, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Why Have You Made my edits dead ?
All the edits I have made on Reserve Bank of India are my knowledge and important for the page. They are not copied. All references are from important sources and news papers in my own language. Mamta Jagdish Dhody (talk) 17:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC) Please remove the lines. Mamta Jagdish Dhody (talk) 17:17, 11 December 2018 (UTC) How can so many users post copyrighted content - you have cancelled many edits on the same date. Mamta Jagdish Dhody (talk) 17:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Revisions containing copyright material added by a different person were hidden from view under under criterion RD1 of the revision deletion policy, and that's why you can't access them any more. In order to completely remove the material from the page history, all the intervening edits have to be hidden, from the time of insertion of the copyright material to its removal. This means that in many instances, harmless edits such as yours have to be hidden in the page history. However, the content you added was not removed, and is still present in the article. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:54, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Does Kautilya3 have some super-authorization to delete as he fancies?
I know nothing of Wikipedia policies and all those abbreviations that Kautilya3 uses (WP:this and WP:that and what not). I cited U.N. Security Council proceedings of 5 February 1948 where Sheikh Abdullah spoke. The ninth paragraph of the cited website (http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/jandk/documents/papers/excerpts_of_sheikh_abdullah's_february_5_1948_speech.htm) states the text that I wrote in the article. Kautilya3 keeps on deleting it. He wrote on my talk page that "I am pinging Diannaa to see if she would like to look into this." You replied on my talk page that "It doesn't appear to be a copyright violation. The source appears to be this article." Even after you confirmed that it was not a copyright violation, Kautilya3 again deleted the sub-section 'Speech in U.N. Security Council' claiming that "It is not an accurate summary of the source". First he deleted stating that it is copyrighted material. After he was proved wrong, he again deleted claiming that the summary is not accurate. Is he the sole arbitrator of what is accurate summary? Is he right in doing so? What is the Wikipedia procedure for stopping his rampage? - Ravindra Rao Rao Ravindra (talk) 19:24, 11 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry but I don't have time to help you with this problem. Your first step is to discuss the content on the article talk page. If you are unable to resolve the dispute that way, please consider one of the steps listed at WP:dispute resolution. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:56, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Congressional Research Service
This article: Draft:Economic history of Venezuela incorporates substantial swaths of material from this Congressional Research Service report. According to this page, the reports are "not subject to copyright protection in the United States", with the important exception that they may incorporate copyrighted material and that material would require permission. Our article on the service has a discussion of copyright status Congressional_Research_Service, which is a little bit murkier. I suspect you've run across this before so I'm interested in your reaction. At a minimum, if this does qualify as public domain, I think there are some templates we require included in the article.-- S Philbrick (Talk)  14:06, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * My opinion is that the material is okay to use if properly attributed. Material copied from other sources may be subject to copyright; for example in https://fas.org/sgp/crs/row/R45072.pdf there's a chart on page 2 that's credited to IMF, World Economic Outlook Database that's not the property of the US Govt and would not be okay to copy. The way to provide attribution is by using  or . But there's also copyright material copied from other sources like this and this and this. Cleaned — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:07, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * , Thanks for your:
 * feedback regarding the copyright status
 * Cleanup of the other issues
 * Identification of the appropriate attribution templates S Philbrick  (Talk)  15:27, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

You've got mail!
Urgent request BilCat (talk) 21:09, 12 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Never mind, the issue was dealt with while I was posting the request. Thanks as always. - BilCat (talk) 21:11, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Isaiah Brian sovi
please diannaa help me to build a better article please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samuel mponda (talk • contribs) 21:31, 12 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I don't have time to help with this. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:35, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing my page.
Hello, Diannaa. I highly appreciate your kind help and I feel very sorry for this issue. Unfortunately, when I used the sources did not spend enough time for paraphrasing. Hope you understand me.--Turkishturan (talk) 17:03, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Gun politics in the United States
Hi Diannaa. I'm a bit concerned about this cleanup of yours. Unless I'm missing something, it introduced :

"The Second Amendment of the US Constitution protects individual gun ownership. The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: 'A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'"

I'm not familiar with procon.org as a reference (RSN mention), and am concerned that "protects individual gun ownership" shouldn't be in Wikipedia's voice given the reference and the debate over that very claim. --Ronz (talk) 22:05, 13 December 2018 (UTC)


 * That content was not added by me; it was added an IP 107.77.208.198 at 23:59, October 25, 2018. All I did was remove a bit of copyvio from CNN. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:55, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * OIC. It wasn't a full rollback, so some of the changes were kept. Nevermind.
 * I run across you work very frequently. Thank you. --Ronz (talk) 01:11, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

History of Albania
Could you then just please help me then? diff. FkpCascais (talk) 23:52, 13 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Here's a link to the Earwig report: here. Which parts of the content do you think are important to include? What is it you are trying to say? Could you instead copy some prose from the compatibly licensed Battle of Kosovo? — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:00, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * This is impotant: "Albanian princes were at that time close allies of the Serbs in their shared desire to oppose the Ottomans. Slavonic and Albanian elements existed side-by-side, and close economic and political ties between Serbs and Albanians existed during the medieval period". FkpCascais (talk) 00:16, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Could we say: "During medieval period, there were close economical and political ties of Serbs and Albanians. Albanian princes were close allies of the Serbs at that time ad fought together against the growing danger of the expansionistic Ottoman empire". FkpCascais (talk) 00:19, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That version is okay from a copyright point of view. How about "Serbs and Albanians had close economic and military ties during the medieval period, as both were under threat from the growing danger of the Ottoman Empire." — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:30, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Just perfect. Thank you Dianaa! FkpCascais (talk) 00:35, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Healthcare in Canada
pls see here--Moxy (talk) 09:32, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I've removed a few things. The remaining ones appear to be quotations. None of this was added recently. Thanks for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:40, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

MS Norsky
Copy vio introduced on this article on 8 October 2016 revision 743166545 from https://www.ship-technology.com/projects/norsky/. I've cleaned it all out. If you could do the revdel please. You might smile at the way he added it in the prose! Lyndaship (talk) 19:58, 14 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Revision deletion complete. Thanks for the report! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:14, 14 December 2018 (UTC)

Lone wolf (terrorism)
Hello. The number of contiguous words from a cited source that are allowed in articles on Wikipedia seems to be variable based on the editor deleting text. I am used to the standard range of contiguous words considered acceptable in journalistic and scholarly publications. So please let me now what you consider and acceptable number of words in a sentence quote and a quoted text block. In some cases I am able to get permission from the original author or copyright holder to use more test. What sort of documentation would be required from authors who have no ability or interest in editing on Wikipedia but would be delighted to be quoted more extensively since the area of research many of us are engaged in is rather small. Thanks.Chip.berlet (talk) 15:11, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia has a very strict copyright policy, stricter in some ways than copyright law itself, because our fair use policy does not allow us to copy material from copyright sources when there's a freely licensed alternative available. In this case the freely licensed material is prose that we write ourselves. You must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Content has to be written in your own words and not include any wording at all from the source material.If you are able to get permission for works to be copied here, we need to have documentation in place that shows the material has been released under a compatible license. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:17, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Def Leppard
Hello Diannaa. I was going to post this at Copyright problems but I wasn't sure as I've never posted there before. We have a new user making many changes at Def Leppard. I reverted one of their edits here, they then added a reference from AllMusic and that seemed to be word for word, so I ran Earwig's Copyvio Detector and got 97%. I have no idea how to fix it, is it old material, is it material being added by the new user, IDK :P Could you please have a look, Thanx. - FlightTime  ( open channel ) 16:13, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The page that shows 97% overlap is copied from Wikipedia rather than the other way around. Comparing with AllMusic shows a little overlap, but the overlap is only song titles and album titles. Additions by the new user don't have anything problematic. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 16:22, 15 December 2018 (UTC)


 * thank you, sorry for misreading The copy-vio page :P -  FlightTime  ( open channel ) 18:29, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Clarification Request
Hi, regarding deletion of a part of my edit on Mardaman, if you have the time I would like to understand how do you walk the line between providing citation and staying objective in a description when it comes to articles dealing with with recent discoveries that aren't abundantly sourced. It appears to me that none of the content I provided was a copyright breach, the only source I could find to fulfill request for better citations that isn't copyrighted was the original press release of the university of tuebingen which is very decisively free of any copyright warnings, and contains the explanation of the link provided by the archeological team that made the discovery. Furthermore, the second half of the section that was not full paraphrase (it was partial) was apparently grounds for deletion of the first half, which was full paraphrase and aside from being a concise description helped to clarify who the translator was (there are multiple Betina Faists...).

In other words, In order to stay professionally objective in assessing the link between Bassetki digsite and the city of Mardraman, one has to resort to providing the source of the connection, but it's not possible to do so without citing the authority of the ancient assyrian translator. If I paraphrase the assessment of the team until it 'sounds more encyclopedic', I give them credibility which, not knowing ancient assyrian, I am unable to give. I suppose I could just avoid making a difficult edit altogether, but then again one of the pillars of wiki editing is supposedly being bold with the edits instead of sweating it into analysis paralysis, and the discovery is very unique and and link between those two locations possibly impactful so it seems more than worthwile to provide concise and factal account of how exactly the claim was made.

Perhaps the edit could be improved instead of complete removal? Thanks in advance for clarification. Sainteris6707 (talk) 18:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Your addition was flagged by a bot as a potential copyright issue and was assessed by myself. Here is a link to the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. Under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. Content that you add to Wikipedia has to be written in your own words and not include any wording from the source material. While I do occasionally paraphrase the copyvio material myself, given the volume of copyvio reports that are filed each day and the amount of time it takes to assess and clean the articles and notify and/or discuss with the editors involved, it's not possible for me to perform re-writes in each instance. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:33, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

The Lynching
Could please peek at The Lynching? Significant portions of this page were revdelled (by you? or ) as part the copyvio investigation into user:Tanbircdq. Significant content has just been added (or re-added? Can't see revdelled content). Per my check via earwig, this includes various snippets copy-pasted into our article without attribution - e.g., ,. I'd appreciate your input on whether this is acceptable, as while copy-pasting from sources without attribution seems wrong to me, I am not as well versed here in the finer details of policy.Icewhiz (talk) 20:08, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for bringing this up,, though I really doubt whether Diannaa needs any more on her plate. I had to stop working on the Tanbircdq CCI because I was reverted or obstructed on virtually every edit by this editor. I agree with your assessment that there is a certain amount of unacceptable copying in the current version of this page; in others such as Jewish Voice for Labour, the problem seems to be more one of excessive quotation. Diannaa, what are your thoughts? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:40, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * As a general observation - they seem to have taken up much of Tanbircdq's content on left-wing UK politics (I've overlapped with them on other article), but they have stayed clear (as far as I recall) of the UK-Bangladeshi / UK-Muslim content (I've made a run down Tanbircdq's created articles (still have a 100 or so to go) - and nominated several for deletion based on non-notability/promo - mainly BLPs (and their associated businesses) listed in a UK-Bangladeshi directory style listings - of the 42 nominations - 1 Keep, 1 NC, 2 Merge, and the other 38 were deletes). They are indeed somewhat aggressive in reverting in the political articles - e.g. JVL. Icewhiz (talk) 21:00, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * - also - Pilgrim State (book) - diffs - (earwig - ) and diff with edit summary ce (despite not being a CE, this adds a few sentences) - copied from earwig1 and earwig2. Icewhiz (talk) 21:27, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I've cleaned the two articles Pilgrim State (book) and The Lynching and left a note on the user's talk page. Thanks for the report, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:11, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Diannaa! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:03, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

User:Lamminiaz
Hi, could you check this guy out? His natural standard of English (clearly a 2nd language) is so-so, but some contributions are suspiciously well-written. Thanks! Johnbod (talk) 20:31, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello Johnbod. I've checked all 74 edits and removed quite a few of them and notified the user as to our expectations. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:11, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Many thanks! Johnbod (talk) 16:16, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Firstly, I would like to thank for your revision and recommendation. I appreciate your feedback. Yes, English is my second languahe and I am trying to improve it. I go to English language courses. I also started using language checkers (Reverso, Ginger, Grammarly) to check my writing. Yes, I made some copied edits, you deleted them. But please take into account that I am still learning rules in Wikipedia, I am a new user. Now I have enough information about copyright rules and I am working on my mistakes. I would be glad to see your feddback in my future edits. Lamminiaz (talk) 12:44, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Revdel request
Hi Diannaa, I've just sent you an e-mail about a possible BLP violation regarding non-notable people that may need to be revdel'ed. Cheers,  Baffle gab1978  21:46, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Replied via email — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:13, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks Dianaa, much appreciated. :) Cheers,  Baffle gab1978  02:50, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Copyright question
Hi Diannaa, I noticed some copyrighted text at Gregory G. Katsas. I removed it and notified the user who added it, but I wasn't sure if I should also request a revdel. Thanks. Marquardtika (talk) 22:07, 15 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Revision deletion complete. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:13, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Israeli combat medical profile
Hello! Could you put your keen eyes on Medical profile as compared to this link? I see many similarities but am not sure which came first. Thank you.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:02, 16 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I can't say for sure because it was never archived by the Wayback Machine, but it looks like a Wikipedia mirror to me. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:09, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Loughmoe East
This page has long been neglected. There are several edits that can be added to the existing narrative; but only if editors etc. are willing to allow for locations in Ireland to be added to Wikipedia. The sources are verified, but the existence of so many Derry villages, and the confusing Loughmoe West means that the sources are few and far between in the public domain. The content has been sub-edited and reduced to adequate copy for the page itself, but it is as yet unfinished. I hope that answers your question. Thanks. user... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.90.152.63 (talk) 19:33, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Draft:Banjo Carmichael
Hi Dianna. Could you take a look at this draft? It appears to be completely copied-and-pasted from https://en.everybodywiki.com/Brandon_Tiehen (including the image). Technically, this might be not be a copyvio because of the licensing for "EverybodyWiki", but there's still no attribution given and it does seem like to WP:PLAGIARISM. FWIW, this subject of the draft might be a case of WP:TOOSOON, but I'm not really concerned about that since it's still a draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:41, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Like attribution within Wikipedia, we can add it after the fact. While there's a template available, I like to do it by adding a blurb at the bottom if the page — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:58, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for taking a look at this. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:04, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

copyright advices
Dear Diannaa, thank you for your message and your advices. I understand, why you removed my article. I study art history and for my studies I’ve done some research work to George Daniell and noted, that there is no meaningful article on Wikipedia about him. For that I ask the museum for more information. Now I’m still in touch with the George Daniell Museum and the ZentralDepot. They gave me the permission to publish the results from my research work and also to use information from their webpages. Do I have to pay attention to anything else?

Best Regards Reike — Preceding unsigned comment added by ReikeW (talk • contribs) 09:55, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * We need to have documentation that shows the copyright holders have given permission for the material to be copied to this website. Wikipedia has procedures in place for this purpose. Please see WP:Donating copyrighted materials for an explanation of how to do it. There's a sample permission email at WP:Consent. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:45, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Reflist columns
Re this edit. Yes, the software does columns automatically that are 30em in width. That results in 3-columns that are unnecessarily wide when using Harvard citations. Setting the width to 20em, I get 4 columns on my screen and that saves a lot of screen space. It is recommended per template's documentation: Template:Reflist. Renata (talk) 16:57, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Chaplet (headgear)
Hello I noticed the edit you made to this page; in the interests of full disclosure, then, I took the piece about the corona radiata from Crown (headgear). Are we supposed to attribute material from elsewhere every time we re-use it? I hadn't thought of doing that. I was mainly only trying to sort out the mess at Corolla (chaplet) (see talk), but once you start something.... Anyway, thanks. Swanny18 (talk) 23:03, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing requires that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted copied template on the talk pages of the source and destination. Please do this any time you copy from one article to another, unless you are the sole author of the material. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:07, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks; still learning! Swanny18 (talk) 17:40, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Potential COPYVIO Derrick Johnson (activist)
Hello Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows a high probability of copyright content in Derrick Johnson (activist), but could be mirror sites of Wikipedia. Regards. Woodlot (talk) 13:23, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thank you for the report. — Diannaa  🍁  (talk) 13:28, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I removed the violations and Diannaa just bet me to the revdel Galobtter (pingó mió) 13:29, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * It was a team effort! Thanks G. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:31, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy Saturnalia

 * Thank you! Best wishes to you also ☃️☃️ — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:54, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you so much
Thank you for adding the attributions to all those articles I moved.... I had every intention of going back and putting the template on talk... but got caught up in some bureaucracy. This is a major concern for many topics. That is articles are being overwhelmed by essays that are really stand alone articles... this I belive is a fallback result of them not being able to create articles anymore. I think one of the best solutions would be to allow students to make new articles..... has this ever come up in the past and where would be the best place to bring it up?--Moxy (talk) 17:50, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Merry

 * Thank you! Best wishes to you also ☃️☃️ — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:55, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

When you have time
I think I see quite a bit of copyvio or at least unattributed text additions by this editor. I almost blocked but in the end wasn't sure. The chronology stuff is from here so may not be copyvio although his edit at People's Mujahedin of Iran certainly seems to be. He's pretty clueless about sources as well. Doug Weller talk 19:56, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * And now there's an edit war over it. I'm not involved. Doug Weller  talk 21:15, 18 December 2018 (UTC)
 * This document is from the US Army and hence is in the public domain. Attribution is required; this can be done using the or  template. I've done revision deletion for the Reuters thing and warned the user. Someone else has filed at the edit warring notice board. Reminds me of the old saying: Never get involved in an edit war in Asia. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 23:18, 18 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Particularly for the template information. I don't think this editor is ever going to get it though. Doug Weller  talk 06:27, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Henry Sutton (inventor)
Hi Diannaa, I'm a little concerned at your recent message relating to copyright and the allegation of "plagiarism". I wanted to clarify one thing with you: I most definitely was quoting from the article in question; however, unfortunately, I forgot to place quotes around the section that was being directly quoted. Can you please clarify that, (i) given it was such a short passage there was no copyright issue, and (ii) the issue of "plagiarism" only arose because the passage in question was not clearly identified as "a quote", and (iii) there's no problem with the passage's reinstatement, if and only if, it is clearly identified as a quotation? Thanks. Lindsay658 (talk) 00:55, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Excuse me but of course there was a copyright issue, as you copied from your sources without any indication that the material was a quote. I see you've gone back and added quotation marks around the other passage you copied. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 13:39, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I am still in the dark. Perhaps my question was not sufficiently well constructed to elicit the sort of answer that would contain the sort of information I was hoping to receive.
 * Please let me put it another way: "Is it acceptable to insert a small passage from a copyright text within a Wikipedia article provided that two conditions are met: (i) the passage is clearly identified as a quote by the inclusion of the passage within quote marks, and (ii) the source of the quoted passage being clearly identified?
 * Also, there's a second issue, on the grounds that I have no copy of the precise text that was present on the page prior to your deletion, "Is there any way that the previously unacceptable material can be made available to me (e.g., via email) so that I can correct whatever formatting errors were present?" — because, as I hoped to communicate to you before, the situations arose through inadvertent formatting errors, rather than through attempts to pass off the work of others as my own. Thanks, in advance. Lindsay658 (talk) 14:49, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I can send you the removed passage by email if you like, but you will have to activate your Wikipedia email first. Alternatively you can get it from the bot report. Click on the iThenticate link to view the overlap. In its goal to be a freely copyable encyclopedia, Wikipedia discourages the use of quotations. Articles should be for the most part written in your own words, not consist of a selection of quotes from your sources. In other words, using quotations should not be considered a good substitute for writing articles yourself in your own words. Using quotations is not a violation of our copyright policy, but excessive use of quotations can be a violation of our non-free content guideline. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:09, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for the clarifications; and, also, for the link that allowed me to see what, indeed, had been deleted. Best, Lindsay658 (talk) 16:32, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Copyright question
In the past I've been told that other wikis, just like Wikipedia, are of the appropriate CC that using their prose is not a copyright violation. However, as this article on Wikivillage shows, they have a copyright symbol on their page, and nowhere does it say that it is free to share and use elsewhere. Came across this at NPP, where Sohilwara was just created, and over 90% of the article is verbatim from Wikivillage. Thought I'd ask a question before tagging it for copyvio. If it is a copyvio, ping me, and I'll check any other work by that editor. Thanks.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:34, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello Onel5969. Not all wikis are released under a compatible license. Wikivillage.in is marked at the bottom as "© 2018 All rights reserved". I have already warned the user for copying from www.census2011.co.in, which looks like a government of India website, but it's not, and even if it were, it would not be okay to copy, because the Government of India copyrights their material. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:41, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Now for advice, would you simply delete the whole page, or only the copyvio and request a RevDel, since it clearly meets notability criteria? I've been doing the latter, but a few times in the last couple of days, the admin doing the RevDel'ing has subsequently redirected the page saying there wasn't enough there to retain? Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 15:12, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * For villages in India, I usually stubbify if I can prove the village exists. Here's the census website that can answer the question of existence definitively. A village as (defined in India) might have tens of thousands of people, so redirecting is not a good choice in my opinion. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:23, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

The Secret Musical Life of Pets abandoned
Hi Diannaa. Due to all the hard work on The Secret Musical Life of Pets, I have to abandon my own project cause I think The Secret Life of Pets is better than The Secret Musical Life of Pets. It has no live-action segments, no talking toys, no 2D animated segments, no swearing, no talking food and no talking cars. Just a family-friendly movie, not a musical. Joeymiskulin (talk) 20:17, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Can you do me a little favor?
I want to create a wikipedia page for the book "Galileo Goes to Jail and Other Myths about Science and Religion" by Ronald L. Numbers.

Can you please create a page?, - then I will fill it with information about the work and the chapters.

I know how to edit, but not how to create a new page.

En historiker (talk) 23:47, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I suggest you start in draft space using the Articles for creation process. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 03:02, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

A. Gettelman Brewing Company correction to history section and Bitter Spring Expedition reference on my talk page
I've modified the history section of the A. Gettelman Brewing Company entry. I tried to modify to my own words to the best I could in my original add, but may not have done enough. I didn't want to exclude too much of the history of the company (as there was much info in the references), and perhaps I didn't modify enough to meet acceptable standards. I've re-written in more so my own words and hopefully it is now in an acceptable form. Stylteralmaldo (talk) 15:07, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Separately, when you posted to my page, you wiki-linked Bitter Spring Expedition rather than the brewery page I had created. I presume this was just a mistake. However, I understand that sometimes Wikipedia uses some automatic postings, and if so, it didn't work in this case. Particularly since I did not make any additions to that page. You may want to look into that, as it could be a flaw in the automatic posting program. Stylteralmaldo (talk) 15:07, 20 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I've done a little more copyright clean-up and it's now ok from a copyright point of view. Sorry about the error in the section header. It's an autofill problem that I occasionally don't notice has occurred. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:53, 20 December 2018 (UTC)

Happy Holidays
Thank you! Best wishes to you also ☃️☃️ — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 07:24, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

NPP question
Hi, Diannaa - when working from the NPP queue, I've come across some of your copyvio work, such as this one and this one. I was wondering if there's a way you and other admins who tag and work with issues that trigger an article to go back into the NPP queue could mark those articles as reviewed after you resolve the issue(s). I was thinking it would help reduce the backlog, and save reviewers from wasting time on redundant reviews. I'm pinging for his input as well. Oh, and I want to thank you for all the work you do in such a very important area - your diligence is admirable. <span style="text-shadow:#F8F8FF 0.2em 0.2em 0.4em,#F4BBFF -0.2em -0.3em 0.6em,#BFFF00 0.8em 0.8em 0.6em;color:#A2006D">Atsme ✍🏻📧 18:16, 22 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the feedback. I don't actually review or even read the articles; I resolve the copyright issue only. I am not comfortable marking as reviewed unless I've verified the content by reviewing the sources, and I don't have time to do that, already spending more time online than is actually healthy! Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:24, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Inquiry of sources used
Good day Ma'am! I would like to ask what is the name of the site(s) or book(s) where I can find sources related to 1. Scholia on Argonautica, 2. Scholia on Iliad, 3. Scholia on Odyssey, 4. Tzetzes on Lycophron, 5. Eustathius on Iliad, and etc. I already searched the internet but couldn't find where these sources came from because I wanted to check or cross-reference the said authors for verification purposes in improving the pages related to Greek mythology. Thank you and hoping for your response. Markx121993 (talk) 07:55, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * If you see vague citations in articles I suggest you contact the people who added them. I don't actually know anything about Greek mythology. That said, some of these sources are old texts that are in the public domain. For example googling "Scholia on Odyssey" pulls up this. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:21, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Hausa people
Thank you for the information. I actually was mindful of that so the word tie-die was linked to the original text. Will take care next time Ppdallo (talk) 10:44, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!
Thank you! Best wishes to you also ☃️☃️ — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:21, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Best wishes
Thank you! ☃️☃️ — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:26, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Merry Chrismouse:)

 * Arla (8307338159).jpg

Hi, hope you have a great festive season. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:33, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

Jack Ridley (pilot)
Diannaa, would mind checking Jack Ridley (pilot) for copyvios, from this diff and before? It certainly seems like it might have been copied from somewhere. Thanks, and Happy Holidays. - BilCat (talk) 23:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)

It looks like much of the article comes from this site, which is listed in the External links sections. The site does display a copyright notice. - BilCat (talk) 23:12, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi BilCat, sorry for the delay. The ultimate source is a 1997 article by the USAF so all is chill. Off to a family thing now - seasons greetings to all . — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:11, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Iste confessor
New article. Haven't done a lot of work on articles which have lyrics and/or translations. Would you take a look at this? I think that at the very least the "Text" section, and portions of the "English Versions" section need to be deleted and revdel'd. I'm deleting the "Literal Translation" as original work. Thanks. Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 11:49, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The original work translations that were created prior to 1923 are in the public domain. I have removed one version, which appears to be modern. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 21:54, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks. New you would figure it out. Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 17:17, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

re:Copying within Wikipedia requires attribution
Thanks for the heads up. I see what you did there on the Pachappa Hill page. I will do that in future.Asiaticus (talk) 16:34, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Copyvio suppression
Thanks for suppressing further, although the copyvio must have started with this edit, which would also need suppression and other edits after that. Shashank5988 (talk) 17:13, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * That revision does not have any overlapping content with the CNN source. Earwig's report — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:24, 24 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Problem was probably with next edit then which was a copyvio. See report Shashank5988 (talk) 17:47, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Done — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 18:27, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Help on my article draft
I created an article on a living person,actor but it says pending request of article. Will you please help me post the article Bimlesh Adhikari .. I think it needs a approval can you help ? AN264 (talk) 19:27, 24 December 2018 (UTC)
 * No sorry you will have to wait your turn in the queue. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 19:30, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

Season's Greetings
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

Hello there! Shearonink (talk) wishes you & yours the very best of the season!

Whether you celebrate Christmas, Diwali, Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, Festivus (for the rest of us!) or even the Saturnalia, here's to hoping your holiday time is wonderful and that the New Year will be an improvement upon the old. CHEERS!

Share these holiday wishes by adding   to your friends' talk pages.

Shearonink (talk) 19:35, 24 December 2018 (UTC)

An awkward decision between two important choices about content
Hello Diannaa, thank you for giving me useful advice. What you said I fully do understand. But because I had no other way to express the most accurate information of this new study, I had to copy and depend entirely on some of the paragraphs in their report, although I did for full citations to the source. The split of my decision into two separate contradictory purposes is to create the most accurate content for Wiki text and respect the copyright of the author's content. But I have committed a serious mistake that depends too much on the original text. I say this with love and gratitude and once again forgive me and thank you so much for reminding me of the mistake, I will refine it accordingly, but I still worry that the paragraph reader cannot understand the original author's original idea. Wikipedia will become great, useful and clean content because there are people as you are. — Enrico Vandenberg (talk) 06:17, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello Enrico Vandenberg. Unfortunately if you are unable to write the content in your own words without violating Wikipedia's copyright policy, you won't be able to include it. The new version is better, but I removed some content that was copied from here. But you must have noticed that other editors have repeatedly removed your addition for reasons other than copyright. So don't be surprised if it's removed again. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:49, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

79.64.114.5
Could we please have immediate attention on user:79.64.114.5? 17:03, 25 December 2018 (UTC)
 * All cleaned. Thank you for the alert. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 17:13, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for Guidance dear Diannaa.
Thank you Dear Diannaa, I had added an accurate incident by Terrorist in the "List of Terrorists incidents in 2008" with PD sources Cites. But have been removed by you, cause of some kind of copypast issues I think. Well I am the Eye witness of this incident. I am providing you the PD sources below. So if you would add this in proper way I will learn better. And will try better next time to do proper editing Thank you.

Assasination of Musa khan among others 1. http://www.aaj.tv/2008/08/anp-leader-four-others-shot-dead-in-swat/ 2. https://www.dawn.com/news/317710/ex-nazim-among-five-shot-dead-in-swat 3. https://wikileaks.org/gifiles/docs/63/63822_sectarian-attacks-in-mosques-in-pakistan-2002-2009-.html 4. http://s443434999.online.de/events/34577-64635-152775.html 5. http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/pakistan/nwfp/timeline/2008.htm

Blew up houses of Musa khan and his brother by terrorists. 6. https://www.dawn.com/news/320877/new-attacks-on-swat-militants-8-killed

Imran.ningolai (talk) 04:09, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello Imran.ningolai. So sorry but you are mistaken; none of these sources are in the public domain, and you can't copy their prose to this wiki. For example AAJ News is marked as "Copyright © 2018 AAJ NEWS. All rights reserved". But under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 04:16, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

possible problem rte Tariff article
I follow tariff issues and one editor has done a lot recently, but I suspect copyvio. there seems to be word-for word overlap with several pages from and the latest edit  https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=875384473  can you check it out? Rjensen (talk) 04:58, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I have removed the material added by those two edits. Sorry you edit conflicted with me while I was doing this and some repairs were made. Hopefully your edits were restored properly. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 07:52, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Copyvio
Wouldn't WP:LONGQUOTE like this in Pakistan and state-sponsored terrorism qualify as COPYVIO? Could you also remove a repeating sentence supported by ref numbered 52 & 53 in this protected article? Many thanks :) - 58.27.134.35 (talk) 10:39, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Quotations are not a violation of the copyright policy. If you have a suggestion for the article please post on its talk page. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:07, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Oskar Schindler - spelling of his company
Diannaa, I noticed you reverted my correction to the page for Oskar Schindler dealing with the spelling of his company in Krakow. I'm grateful for all your hard work here at Wikipedia, but I believe this was a mistake. Schindler spelled his company's name: "Deutsche Emailwarenfabrik". It's true, "emaillewaren" seems to be an accepted alternate German spelling, but you can see an actual piece of letterhead from his DEF office in the museum in Krakow in a closeup photo in this gallery: https://www.greatphotos.eu/oskarschindlerfactory In addition, "Emailwarenfabrik" is the spelling used in the book "Schindler's Ark", the film "Schindler's List", and by the authority that runs the museum, as shown on their websites here: http://muzea.malopolska.pl/en/czy-wiesz-ze/-/a/10191/historia-deutsche-emailwarenfabrik and here: https://www.mhk.pl/branches/oskar-schindlers-factory/14 I also looked in the book cited as a source on Google books, and it doesn't use the alternate spelling either. I think we can safely leave it as "Deutsche Emailwarenfabrik" Best, James Jamesluckard (talk) 11:54, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Ok thanks — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:08, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Copy Patrol discussion at WT:CP
Some bludgeoning going on there. The whole thread could have been wrapped up days ago but somebody won't let it go! Nthep (talk) 12:26, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I am leaving, gotta get back to work! These copyvios aren't gonna repair themselves! — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:28, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Improper deletions of information in the public domain
You have deleted information from Nauck, Virginia, that is derived from documents that are in the public domain. A reference citing the source of the information (https://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/31/2014/02/NC_2004_NauckVillageCtrActionPlan.pdf) demonstrates that the source is an Arlington County, Virginia, government planning document (Nauck Village Center Action Plan). Further, another source for the information (https://www.hmdb.org/marker.asp?marker=2504) copies information that is present on a historical marker that that the Arlington County government has erected. All of the information that you deleted is therefore in the public domain. I am therefore undoing the deletions that you improperly performed.

I suggest that, in the future, you scrutinize the sources of information in Wikipedia articles before you delete the information. This will save time and help prevent conflicts between editors. Thank you. Corker1 (talk) 14:53, 27 December 2018 (UTC) talk:Corker1|talk]]) 14:51, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Corker1. While material produced by the US Government is in the public domain, material produced by the individual states, counties, and municipalities is not. Sorry, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 14:54, 27 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Please provide the source (if any) for your statement that material produced by the individual states, counties, and municipalities is not in the public domain. If possible, provide a citation to a court decision that has confirmed this. Corker1 (talk) 15:00, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Under current copyright law, literary works are subject to copyright whether they are tagged as such or not. No registration is required, and no copyright notice is required. So please always assume that all material you find online is copyright. Exceptions include works of the US federal Government and material specifically released under license. There's some information on this topic at commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:04, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * See https://www.harrisbeach.com/new-york-municipalities-blog/state-and-local-government-works-may-be-copyrighted. Local governments, such as Arlington County, Virginia, that have not promulgated ordinances that state that their materials are copyrighted and/or whose materials do not bear copyright information have not exercised their rights to copyright materials that they produce. Wikipedia editors should therefore assume that information in produced by local governments is in the public domain except where local ordinances or specific documents state otherwise. Corker1 (talk) 15:21, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * In this case though, they have. The Nauck Action plan is linked from Arlington's web site (ref: https://projects.arlingtonva.us/plans-studies/land-use/nauck-village-center-action-plan/ ). From the T&C of that site: No person may, however, sell, distribute, modify, transmit, reuse, repost, use or create derivative works based on the content of the website in whole or part for any purpose without the written permission in each instance from Arlington County Government or the owner of such content. Therefore that content cannot be used here as it does not allow derivative works or reuse. Ref:https://www.arlingtonva.us/terms-conditions/ . <b style="color: black;">Crow</b><i style="color: black">Caw</i> 15:23, 27 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The information removed from Nauck, Virginia is available in public documents that the Arlington County government has distributed and on a historical marker that the County government has erected. The County government obtained the information from non-County sources. The County does not hold a copyright on the information itself. The information is therefore in the public domain. The fact that the County distributed this information on its website does not imply that a person cannot reproduce, modify or distribute the information itself, even if the County government has reproduced the information on its website. Corker1 (talk) 15:57, 27 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The only indication we have is that the material is copyrighted by Arlington due to being on its web site. Unless you can positively show that this content was PD or freely licensed prior to its inclusion on Arlington's site, then we have to assume it is copyrighted. If you can, we'd be glad to include it, but we need "positive proof", meaning the absence of a notice somewhere is not sufficient, since a copyright has been asserted. <b style="color: black;">Crow</b><i style="color: black">Caw</i> 15:59, 27 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The first page of the "Nauck Action Plan" states that the Arlington County Board approved the Action Plan in November 2018. The Action Plan was therefore in the public domain and publicly distributed before and during the meeting at which the County Board approved the Plan. The County placed the approved Action Plan on its website after that meeting had taken place. The same conditions apply for the cited historical markers, which were erected before HMdb.org reproduced the markers' information on its website. Corker1 (talk) 16:34, 27 December 2018 (UTC)


 * We would need proof that it was Public Domain before that. Under copyright law, any creative work is automatically copyrighted as soon as it is "fixed in a tangible medium". So as soon as it was written, it was copyrighted to somebody. That somebody would have had to commit it to the Public Domain, either by overt act, by nature of their job (e.g. federal government) or by contractual arrangement if the work was done for hire with that specification. I know it seems intuitive that these public markers and such are Public Domain, the reality is that this is often not the case, so we need to see the PD dedication or other evidence. Or you can just re-write the content in your own words, using the document as a source for the fact, but having the creative presentation (i.e. the prose) be your own. <b style="color: black;">Crow</b><i style="color: black">Caw</i> 16:36, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I re-wrote in my own words the contents of the "Nauck Action Plan" and of the historical markers before I placed the contents on Wikipedia. You can ascertain this by comparing the deleted wording in the Wikipedia article and the wording in the cited sources for the article.  Further, actions of the Arlington County Board (including documents that the County government distributes to the public before and during Board meetings) are in the public domain because of the public nature of the Board meetings and of the Board's actions at those meetings. Corker1 (talk) 17:07, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Again, we need something that positively confirms PD status specific to the material in question. <b style="color: black;">Crow</b><i style="color: black">Caw</i> 17:05, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Again, I re-wrote in my own words the contents of the "Nauck Action Plan" and of the historical markers before I placed the contents on Wikipedia. You can ascertain this by comparing the deleted wording in the Wikipedia article and the wording in the cited sources for the article. Further, the information on the historical markers and in the "Nauck Action Plan" is derived from other sources and is therefore not original material that others can copyright. 17:14, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * "Nauck was founded in 1719" is not original content. The text of the marker shows a specific word selection and order beyond rote dissertation of facts, which means it is. I'm sorry, but in the form it was presented in the article it does not meet our copyright policy for inclusion. <b style="color: black;">Crow</b><i style="color: black">Caw</i> 17:25, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The original source of information for the deleted content is the "Nauck: A Neighborhood History" historical marker at https://www.hmdb.org/marker.asp?marker=2504, which a person photographed and submitted to HMdb.org in 2007.  The marker states that the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority erected the marker.
 * Immediately following the deleted content, the marker contains the following statement: "Text courtesy of Dr. Alfred O. Taylor, Jr." This statement makes it clear that the the author of the content (Dr. Taylor) placed the content in the public domain as a courtesy to the Northern Virginia Park Authority.  Any assumed copyright for the historic marker (which actually contains no copyright statement) cannot cover information that another person or entity had provided to the copyright holder as a courtesy.
 * The Arlington County government copied Dr. Taylor's content (with a few corrections) into its "Nauck Action Plan", which the Arlington County Boad approved in 2014. The "Nauck Action Plan" does not  attribute the content to either Dr. Taylor or to the Northern Virginia Park Authority.  The Arlington County government has therefore determined that the content is in the public domain.
 * Please therefore restore the deleted content to the article, if you are able to do so. Corker1 (talk) 14:27, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

Deletion of content in Fisher market
Hi Diannaa, the content you have just deleted is taken from my own paper: http://docplayer.net/49683533-Arxiv-v1-cs-gt-11-may-2017.html, which I published in arXiv under the arXiv license. I have now sent a confirmation email to permissions-en@undefinedwikimedia.org. Please undelete the contents. --Erel Segal (talk) 15:53, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Erel. There are several available Creative Commons licenses under the arXiv license. Which one is it licensed under? Not all are compatible. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:32, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * When I submit a paper to arXiv, I usually select the default license which is "arXiv.org - Non-exclusive license to distribute" (https://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/license.html).
 * In my email to permissions-en@undefinedwikimedia.org, I also selected the default license in WP:Consent. --Erel Segal (talk) 08:01, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi Diannaa. I've confirmed the permission at Talk:Fisher market. Please unhide the revision at your convenience. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 08:27, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Revision restored. Thank you JJMC89 and Erel Segal for taking the time to get these permissions in place. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:14, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Northern Anatolian conifer and deciduous forests
Hello, Diannaa. I think you may have jumped the gun in deleting the material in Northern Anatolian conifer and deciduous forests as a copyright violation. I believe it is correctly licensed as CC-BY-SA-3.0

I had cited as the CC-BY-SA-3.0 source (Encyclopedia of Earth, EoE) for the material in the article. See the CC-BY-SA-3.0 license at the bottom of that page. Also notice that that article was written by the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) itself, as part of a series for that encyclopedia. The WWF is the author of that material and it released its own copyrighted material under CC-BY-SA-3.0, as of 2014.

The website you cite does not have a CC-BY-SA-3.0 license. However, CC-BY-SA-3.0 is an irrevocable license. Once the WWF consented to release the material via CC-BY-SA-3.0, it cannot then subsequently prevent anyone from using the material in a manner consistent with that license (see, e.g., WP:REVOKE).

The WWF has released other material on its own web page via CC-BY-SA-3.0 in 2011 and 2012. See, e.g., the bottom of this archive link. I believe this shows that the EoE is not engaging in copyright violation itself, but is correctly conveying the license and consent from the WWF.

If you find this explanation satisfactory, could you kindly unhide and restore my revision at Northern Anatolian conifer and deciduous forests? I spent a fair amount of time formatting and correcting the material, and it would be nice to not have that work go to waste.

If you do not find this explanation satisfactory, please ping me here and let's discuss further. Thanks! —hike395 (talk) 17:17, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi hike395. Unfortunately I have no way of verifying their claim that the material was donated by the WWF and released under license. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:39, 27 December 2018 (UTC)


 * If I could get confirmation that the WWF donated the material under CC-BY-SA-3.0, would that satisfy you? I can attempt to ask the topic editor for EoE either (a) for some evidence of the donation, or (b) a contact point within the WWF to confirm the donation. —hike395 (talk) 01:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * The way to do it is to have the WWF contact the OTRS team and provide proof that they've released it under license. There's instructions at WP:Donating copyrighted materials and a sample permission email at WP:Consent. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 02:25, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Possible COPYVIO Odessa Sea
Hi Diannaa, Earwig's Copyvio Detector is showing a high probability of copyright content in the Odessa Sea article. Woodlot (talk) 20:12, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Fixed, Thanks — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 20:20, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Copyright issues
you are quite right that properly attributed quotes are acceptable. But I am sure you will agree with me that this is just too excessive and indeed violates our WP:NFCC policy. Whole paragraphs have been copy pasted en masse.Dilpa kaur (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2018 (UTC)
 * I am sure you will agree that Kashmir conflict is a controversial topic. It's likely that at least some of the quotes should remain. You need to talk about this on the article talk page. Thanks, — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 15:47, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

11KSmith
Hi Diannaa! Thank you so much in letting me know in how to properly edit Wiki pages. I will re-edit the information I posted on the OVS Gang per your instructions. I was planning to start adding more information on other Wiki pages and will do so based on the Wiki guidelines and your instructions. Thank you once again and happy holidays! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 11KSmith (talk • contribs) 22:22, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

John Watson Tadwell Watson copyright issues
Please refer to my talk page. Shipsview (talk) 19:37, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Laurie Scott Baker
Good morning, Diannaa, appropriate permission via OTRS for the use of http://www.composer.co.uk/composers/baker.html at Laurie Scott Baker has been received. I have added the ticket to the talk page and restored the content from before the CP blanking. --B (talk) 11:34, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Hello B. There doesn't seem to be any content in the old revisions that isn't present in the current version. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:47, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Greetings.
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:#FF4646; background-color:#F6F0F7; border-width:2px; text-align:left; padding:0.5em 0.5em 0 0.5em; border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);;" class="plainlinks">Happy Holidays text.png Hello Diannaa: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers,  D Big X ray ᗙ  15:29, 31 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

Hope the new year will bring more friendly debates and collaboration for us. Best wishes. Cheers -- D Big X ray ᗙ  15:29, 31 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you! Best wishes — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:09, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Diannaa!
<div style="border: 3px solid #FFD700; background-color: #FFFAF0; padding:0.2em 0.4em;height:173px;border-radius: 1em; box-shadow: 0.1em 0.1em 0.5em rgba(0,0,0,0.75);" class="plainlinks">

Happy New Year! Diannaa, Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Rubbish computer (Talk: Contribs) 17:38, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.


 * Thank you! Best wishes — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 00:10, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Response to Odessa sea changes
Hello, I just wanted to point out that none of what you removed from the page on Odessa sea was writen by me. Just wanted to clarify, in case the blocking system works by cointing the number of offences. Anyway, I do appreciate the other information you provided me, and I added refrences for what I did do. Thanks! Prhee0236 (talk) 23:48, 31 December 2018 (UTC)