User talk:Moneytrees/Archive 4

New Page Review newsletter November 2019
Hello ,

This newsletter comes a little earlier than usual because the backlog is rising again and the holidays are coming very soon. There are now holders of the New Page Reviewer flag! Most of you requested the user right to be able to do something about the huge backlog but it's still roughly less than 10% doing 90% of the work. Now it's time for action. Exactly one year ago there were 'only' 3,650 unreviewed articles, now we will soon be approaching 7,000 despite the growing number of requests for the NPR user right. If each reviewer soon does only 2 reviews a day over five days, the backlog will be down to zero and the daily input can then be processed by every reviewer doing only 1 review every 2 days - that's only a few minutes work on the bus on the way to the office or to class! Let's get this over and done with in time to relax for the holidays. Want to join? Consider adding the NPP Pledge userbox. Our next newsletter will announce the winners of some really cool awards. Admin has been officially invested as NPP/NPR coordinator by a unanimous consensus of the community. This is a complex role and he will need all the help he can get from other experienced reviewers. Paid editing is still causing headaches for even our most experienced reviewers: This official Wikipedia article will be an eye-opener to anyone who joined Wikipedia or obtained the NPR right since 2015. See The Hallmarks to know exactly what to look for and take time to examine all the sources. Would you like feedback on your reviews? Are you an experienced reviewer who can give feedback to other reviewers? If so there are two new feedback pilot programs. New Reviewer mentorship will match newer reviewers with an experienced reviewer with a new reviewer. The other program will be an occasional peer review cohort for moderate or experienced reviewers to give feedback to each other. The first cohort will launch November 13. The annual ArbCom election will be coming up soon. All eligible users will be invited to vote. While not directly concerned with NPR, Arbcom cases often lead back to notability and deletion issues and/or actions by holders of advanced user rights. There is to be no wish list for WMF encyclopedias this year. We thank Community Tech for their hard work addressing our long list of requirements which somewhat overwhelmed them last year, and we look forward to a successful completion. To opt-out of future mailings, you can remove yourself here MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:33, 3 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Getting the queue to 0
 * Coordinator
 * This month's refresher course
 * Tools
 * It is now possible to select new pages by date range. This was requested by reviewers who want to patrol from the middle of the list.
 * It is now also possible for accredited reviewers to put any article back into the New Pages Feed for re-review. The link is under 'Tools' in the side bar.
 * Reviewer Feedback
 * Second set of eyes
 * Not only are New Page Reviewers the guardians of quality of new articles, they are also in a position to ensure that pages are being correctly tagged for deletion and maintenance and that new authors are not being bitten. This is an important feature of your work, especially while some routine tagging for deletion can still be carried out by non NPR holders and inexperienced users. Read about it at the Monitoring the system section in the tutorial. If you come across such editors doing good work, don't hesitate to encourage them to apply for NPR.
 * Do be sure to have our talk page  on your watchlist. There are often items that require reviewers' special attention, such as to watch out for pages by known socks or disruptive editors, technical issues and new developments, and of course to provide advice for other reviewers.
 * Arbitration Committee
 * Community Wish list

Lil Nas X
In my previous edit summary on Lil Nas X I accidentally pressed enter before I finished typing so I got cut off. Anyway what I meant to say was that you’re telling me someone’s gonna type Lil Nas X’s whole name out when they are looking for just Nas? Doesn’t make sense to me. Billiekhalidfan (talk) 03:24, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , I don't know, I just felt someone particularly ignorant to rap would get the two confused. I don't really have any strong feelings on the matter, though; You have my permission to revert. 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 03:31, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

II-VI Incorporated
Hello, I'm new to editing on Wikipedia. I work for II-VI Incorporated and one of my projects is to update our Wikipedia page. I am just pulling the information from our website and matching it up on our Wikipedia profile. Is this not allowed? I am just using the information from our website. AndrewMcD51 (talk) 15:09, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , First of all, as someone who is working on a company's article at their request for a "project", you need to read Paid-contribution disclosure, assuming you're receiving some sort of compensation for editing the page. Second, on the issue of the copyright violation, while your company is likely fine with you copying text from their website into the article, the text needs to be released under an appropriate license so that it may be copied into the article as to apply with wikipedia's terms of use. Read WP:DONATETEXT on how to do this. Thanks, 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 15:32, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

So another question then - if I use quotations and cite each example of text I update for the end market information, would that be acceptable? AndrewMcD51 (talk) 15:35, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Also for the "paid contribution disclosure" part - it says as long as I say that in the edit summaries that is fine. So I can just add that in the edit notes and that is acceptable, correct? AndrewMcD51 (talk) 15:41, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , For the first part about quotes, no, that would not be acceptable; See WP:QUOTEFARM. For the second part, yes, you should say so in the edit summaries, but you should also put a statement on your user page noting the payments, which I've gone ahead and done for you. 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI!  15:56, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for adding that to my page. In the meantime while I discuss what I have read on the text being released, I will not use the copied text but instead use my own words and structure to paraphrase while also citing the source. AndrewMcD51 (talk) 16:05, 8 November 2019 (UTC)

A survey to improve the community consultation outreach process
Hello!

The Wikimedia Foundation is seeking to improve the community consultation outreach process for Foundation policies, and we are interested in why you didn't participate in a recent consultation that followed a community discussion you’ve been part of.

Please fill out this short survey to help us improve our community consultation process for the future. It should only take about three minutes.

The privacy policy for this survey is here. This survey is a one-off request from us related to this unique topic.

Thank you for your participation, Kbrown (WMF) 10:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Mikola

 * Miroslav Ruzica clame that "many Serbian, Montenegrin, Croatian, Bulgarian, Greek and especially Albanian shepherds" mix with Vlachs groups. While "some Montenegrin and Albanian clans claim to have same ancestors". Further is clame that Herzegovinian and Montenegrin clan structure is shaped by Vlachs and Slavization. The Pastrovic tribe in Montenegro, Poljice Republic in Croatia or  Bunjevci from Vojvodina probably have partially Vlach origin if this were sufficiently explored.  Is it okay now without breaking the rules and i wonder where it says in some source that these sources should not be copied, thanks Mikola22 (talk) 13:45, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , Yes, that should be good. At the bottom of most webpages, there should be a copyright notice, sometimes, it is hard to see. 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 13:59, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Hello Money emji I am Ada
Hi there, I notice that you contributed some articles and wondering if you would be interested in collaboration? I am trying to improve the article APM Monaco. Please let me know, looking forward to hearing from you. --Ada Wan (talk) 09:36, 14 November 2019 (UTC)Ada Wan

Edit to John II Casimir Vasa
You've removed a chunk of text from this page, calling it a "large copyvio". That text appears to be from a work published in 1873 and hence in the public domain, so I'm puzzled as to how this could be a copyright violation (although it should be properly attributed). Choess (talk) 23:03, 15 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , I was going off the copyright notice at the bottom, which indicated that it was not in public domain/had a free license. I missed the text noting the page was extracted for an 1800 book that would be PD. You'd think something like that would be at the bottom, but oh well. I was somewhat hasty in my overview of the website, as I was looking at the article based off of its listing at this CCI. I know you've worked on another CCI (and quite an infamous one at that), so I think you get the reason for my hastyness. Speaking of Craigy144, I'm planning on targeting that CCI early next year for my grand assault against the backlog there- You're welcome to join, if you so like. Thanks for pointing this out! 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 03:01, 16 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Completely understood! The best clue here is the somewhat archaic flavor of the prose: that's often an indication that it was extracted from a PD-old type source. Thanks for all your work at CCI, which is a monstrously large task.
 * Successfully clearing off the Craigy144 investigation will probably require access to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (which he's known to have copied from) and Burke's Peerage (not clear if he copied when he used that as a source, but should probably be investigated). Choess (talk) 03:45, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Copyright problem
This article has been tagged as part of a large-scale clean-up project of multiple article copyright infringement. It will likely be deleted after one week unless it is rewritten to remove content placed by the article's creator, who has placed copyrighted content into Wikipedia from multiple sources without verifying permission. For instance, in this edit he placed content here from (the copyright holders have complained; OTRS agents see 2010081210007017). In this edit, he evidently copied content from this journal article, page 2. Other content he placed may also violate copyright policies.

For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions must be deleted. Major contributions by contributors who have been verified to have violated copyright in multiple articles may be presumptively deleted in accordance with Copyright violations.

Interested contributors are invited to help clarify the copyright status of this material or rewrite the article in original language at the temporary page linked from the article's face. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:39, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I couldn't figure out where you wanted it, so you get it here. Cheers, Wily D 12:45, 20 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , Thank you very much; I meant to say Wikipedia talk:Contributor copyright investigations/20100114, but its also fine here, I really just needed to know what the article had plagiarized from. Thanks a ton, 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 13:20, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

copyright
Hey, Money emoji! You'd said over at the mentoring page that if anyone needed help figuring out copyright, you were available. I could use some tutoring in how to recognize it lol. I've generally just relied on tools like Earwig for dyk purposes, but in helping Elisa I'm finding that it's not a sensitive enough tool. (You can take a look at the discussions re: John Hoyle (died 1692) and see what I missed there, for instance, and I'd literally taken at least a look at every available cited source. The problem was the copyvio was from a source that was no longer cited.) At any rate, help figuring out copyvio would be great! --valereee (talk) 14:01, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , No problem (figuring out how to use earwig can be quite challenging), here is some information that can be helpful in Elisa's case;
 * The default setting on earwig looks at all the sources in the article, and looks a few keywords up online (You can also use turnitin but it doesn't seem to do much in my experience with the tool). Earwig will, about 95% of the time, find the violations committed in the article. Occasionally, however, it doesn't, and you won't get any results. If this happens and you're suspicious of the text, I would look at it and figure out if it's worded in a suspicious way (eg. Isn't wp prose). I would then remove/reword anything that looks particularly fishy, but I wouldn't go overboard; keep in mind that some things have a limited way of being said.
 * If you aren't already, work off of Elisa's CCI by clicking on the diffs after the article listing. Sources inserted in those edits may have been removed over time and thus may not show up on earwig like what happened on John Hoyle. Take the URL of the removed sources and copy it into the box that says "URL comparison:", and then enter the name of the article. Here's an example.
 * In Elisa's case, while a good deal of copying came from sources available online, some aren't, and will have to be found IRL. In most cases where copying from offline sources happened a lot in a CCI, there would be presumptive removals; fortunately, however, unlike those CCIs, Elisa isn't a cbanned LTA, and can be contacted on site. Thus, I am going to go through the CCI and compile a list of online sources cited, and dump them somewhere, so we can systematically check the sources for violations; either through Elisa's copies of the sources, or through other means, like going to a library (there's 8 of us, and I have some on and off site friends that can help us out). Whatever way we try to combat the CCI, I will promise you, and you can hold me to this, that the CCI WILL be completed within a year and won't become part of the backlog there. Sorry for the whole essay, 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 16:57, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Not at all, thank you for the whole essay! :) Yes, happy to help with offline sources, I have access to one of the best public library systems in the country. --valereee (talk) 17:48, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Not at all, thank you for the whole essay! :) Yes, happy to help with offline sources, I have access to one of the best public library systems in the country. --valereee (talk) 17:48, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

Continuation -- would you take a look at Jay Fai? I had changed a single word and ran Earwig and was alarmed, made some changes, and then realized that everything I was changing had supposedly come from different sources, even though it was all in a couple of areas in the purported copyvio, and the copyvio source isn't even one of our current sources. But they also aren't mirroring us. There's no date on the source of the purported copyvio: https://news.destination-asia.com/exceptionalexperiences/a-fascinating-journey/ I'm confused. I reverted myself, but now I'm wondering if I should re-revert to just be safe? Thanks for any advice! --valereee (talk) 12:31, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , Actually, looking at the earwig scan, I noticed some archives at the bottom of the page. Investigating the site more, I found that the webpage earwig scanned was actually published in March 2018, along with other articles in a series called "Women who are changing the world". Looking at our article's history, no text from that website was inserted after/on that date, meaning that the website actually plagiarized from us. Don't worry, mirrors/offsite copying aren't usually this complex. If you aren't sure if a website is plagiarizing from us or it's the other way around, feel free to come to me, or just remove the text. (If I can't tell I usually remove the text). Happy to help, 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 13:17, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I was waffling, thinking to remove just to be on the safe side, but there was nothing wrong with the article as written and my changes didn't improve, just changed. --valereee (talk) 13:32, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Convenience link to the Earwig: here. --valereee (talk) 12:34, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Precious anniversary
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:24, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Greda. I've come a long way since then..... 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 18:16, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

Large articles
Regarding your comment on the AfD, where can one find a list of the largest articles? Home Lander (talk) 21:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , Special:LongPages. Most of the top few pages are political/war/list- type articles, making it stick out there. Apparently Soil is also massive? 💵Money💵emoji💵Talk💸Help out at CCI! 01:56, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks. This could be a good time waster for me to find more articles like the one at ANI. Home Lander (talk) 03:00, 30 November 2019 (UTC)