User talk:Mohamed Hany Ashour

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 24)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Mohamed Hany Ashour/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=User:Mohamed_Hany_Ashour/sandbox Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DoubleGrazing&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Mohamed_Hany_Ashour/sandbox reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:55, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Mohamed Hany Ashour/sandbox


A tag has been placed on User:Mohamed Hany Ashour/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://doi.org/10.1007/s11695-022-06338-9. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:56, 24 October 2023 (UTC)


 * How can i verify that it's my own content? Mohamed Hany Ashour (talk) 12:24, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * It's almost never okay to copypaste large amounts of content like that, even if it weren't a copyright violation.
 * The external source where the matching content was found clearly claims copyright, and that's what we have to abide by, at least until such time as it can be ascertained that copyright isn't an issue.
 * If you wish to donate content to Wikipedia, you will find some information on that at WP:DCM. I advise you also to read our copyvio guidance at WP:CV.
 * Finally please note that even if the copyright matter is resolved, it doesn't mean that this content can necessarily be accepted into Wikipedia, because it wasn't written as an encyclopaedia article but rather a scientific paper. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:45, 25 October 2023 (UTC)