User talk:Dtallon~enwiki

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Dtallon. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Dtallon~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:35, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 12:21, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

July 2016
Hello! Thank you for your recent contributions to Oklahoma Department of Rehabilitation Services. I did have one note for you. I am working on a maintenance project to clean up Category:Pages using infoboxes with thumbnail images. In the future, please do not use thumbnails when adding images to an infobox (see WP:INFOBOXIMAGE). If you have any questions, let me know! :-) You can respond on my talk page, or here. If you respond here, please include  in your response so I am notified. -- Zackmann08  (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)  Zackmann08  (Talk to me/What I been doing) 16:44, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Oklahoma School for the Blind
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and not a web hosting service. A lot of your recent additions are going to be reverted. It is written like pamphlet. TVGarfield (talk) 23:44, 25 January 2018 (UTC) —TVGarfield thank you for your input, while I have been updating tidbits on wikipedia for a while filling out a page is some what new to me. (I am still just trying to figure out if this the right way to reply to you.) As a promoter of the schools any time I see something the could potentially hurt the school, we jump. So I filled out the page with key information that parents always look for from us. I am totally in agreement with the changes you made and hope the page can stay like that. I want to add more about its history but there are only so many hours in the day. Thank you and I will try do better in the future. Dtallon~enwiki (talk) 00:14, 26 January 2018 (UTC) Dana Tallon, Oklahoma Department of Rehabilitation Services

You do have a conflict of interest WP:COI. Information that parents need is unfortunately not relevant to an encyclopedia article. After further review of the edits I have restored a lot of the original information. Really, everything you added should be removed since there is not a single reference Reference for any of it. Your school web site is also not a Reliable Source since it is a primary source. You should find some sources to add. TVGarfield (talk) 05:40, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

The material was copied directly from the school website, and thus was a copyright violation. Please don't add copyright material to this wiki. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:56, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

Oklahoma School for the Blind
You are in disagreement with my edit here on the basis that you believe the material to be in the public domain.

There are a couple issues to discuss. If you wrote the material, then there is a conflict of interest issue, but let's leave that aside for now.

When I asked why you thought the material was in the public domain, you pointed me to: Copyright status of works by subnational governments of the United States

That article asserts that material created by states will be in the public domain if the material qualifies as an "edict of government" which is further defined at Edict of government

I read that as covering the state laws, and similar materials such as administrative rulings, but not materials such as general discussions of governmental organizations, for example, Oklahoma Department of Rehabilitation Services.

I will ping our resident copyright expert on the chance that I missing something. S Philbrick  (Talk)  16:06, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with S Philbrick that the document enjoys copyright protection. — 🎆 Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:25, 2 January 2020 (UTC)