User talk:Oxy86

March 2023
Hello. Your recent edit appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 22:44, 28 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello,
 * Thanks for the message. However, I am confused and, to be honest, concerned about the "non-notable entity" comment of yours (and your revert that apparently stems from that comment). Please follow my thoughts here:
 * That WP page has a list of Social Network Analysis software applications, and SocNetV is such an application. It is free and open-source software (See full source-code in Github: https://github.com/socnetv/app), it is being developed for 15+ years, and it has been included twice in the Github Archive Vault (https://archiveprogram.github.com/). And, to get to the real point here, SocNetV is widely used in academia, as you can see for yourself with a simple search in Google Scholar for SNA papers referring to it (here you are: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&q=socnetv&btnG=).
 * So, can you please tell me on what grounds you say that SocNetV is "a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries"?
 * Moreover, in your opinion, what constitutes a "notable entity", in this case a SNA application, if not for a free and open-source cross-platform application used by many researchers world-wide to produce their mathematical sociology papers, just as SocNetV? For instance, why a commercial application, called InfiniteGraph, should be there and not SocNetV? And who's to decide that? On what grounds?
 * I believe that you have made a mistake here, and I would like you to think about it. Please take back the revert and allow SocNetV to be listed in that page. Oxy86 (talk) 07:31, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Notable on Wikipedia is shorthand for 'qualifies for a Wikipedia article'. The article should be written before the software is added to lists - that is the inclusion criteria for the list. - MrOllie (talk) 12:41, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Hello again,
 * Sorry, but I have to ask this. Is this some kind of joke? Are you trolling me? The very page about Notability that you are referring to makes it explicit (in bold and H2 heading) that:
 * "Notability guidelines do not apply to content within articles or lists".
 * So, I repeat the question: Are you trolling me? Oxy86 (talk) 19:26, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * No. That is the inclusion criteria for that list. In fact, it is the most common inclusion criteria for lists of software on Wikipedia, by far. If you don't trust me for whatever reason, feel free to bring it up at WP:TEAHOUSE, where I'm sure you'll be told the same thing. MrOllie (talk) 19:29, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * This is insane. It is obvious to anyone understanding common English that the "Wikipedia:Notability" page refers only to the topics that WP deems relevant to include. It says so in the very nutshell of the page:
 * "The notability guideline does not determine the content of articles, but only whether the topic may have its own article."
 * In this case, I don't want to create an article about the application, I just want to add SocNetV in a simple list along with its peers.
 * I don't want to escalate this further, as you probably suggested here (I wonder why?), because the whole thing is a complete waste of our time.
 * Once more, please take back your revert and allow SocNetV to be listed in that page along with all other "notable" software. Oxy86 (talk) 19:44, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Are you associated with SocNetV in some fashion? If so, please read WP:COI. I will not be taking back my revert, because your software does not meet that list's inclusion criteria. MrOllie (talk) 19:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Oxy86! Your additions to Social network analysis software have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Please see Donating copyrighted materials.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 21:56, 29 March 2023 (UTC)


 * Hello @Diannaa and thanks for the reply.
 * Can you please tell me what parts of my additions do you consider as "copyrighted content"? I just added some info about the application: the name, the file formats it supports and the main features. There were no images, no links, or anything fishy there. Just a small amount of plain textual info about the application, in the same exact manner as the other applications appearing on that list.
 * Honestly, I don't understand why it is that difficult to add info about an open-source Social Network Analysis software application to a Wikipedia list article about Social Network Analysis Software. SocNetV is such a software, it is licensed under GPL3, and it should be there along with the other commercial solutions.
 * Please note, the other curator, @M .Ali 99, who removed my addition, said that he/she did that on the grounds that the software is not "a non-notable entity". When I disputed that, mentioning that it is a free software application used in academia and mentioned in quite a number of sociology papers, he/she referenced Notable ("Wikipedia:Notability") as the basis of the removal. I read that WP article and it explicitly says
 * "The notability guideline does not determine the content of articles, but only whether the topic may have its own article."
 * When I quoted that to the editor, reminding him/her that I did not add a new article but some info on an existing article, he/she kept insisting that he/she is not wrong here. And now, all of a sudden, you come forward saying that my additions have been removed for another reason: copyright.
 * What can I say, there is no point in this. Thank you very much for your time. 2A02:587:4514:7D01:D9FA:5EEB:9994:5F3B (talk) 06:02, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Edit: The curator's handle is MrOllie, not M .Ali 99, sorry for that. 2A02:587:4514:7D01:D9FA:5EEB:9994:5F3B (talk) 06:03, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Content was a match for that at https://socnetv.org/docs/index.html, a copyright web page. You can view the overlap by going to the CopyPatrol report and clicking on the iThenticate link. — Diannaa (talk) 10:24, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Forgot to say, GNU Free Documentation License alone is not a compatible license. Also note the page where I found the matching content is marked as "Copyright © 2005-2021 Dimitris V. Kalamaras" — Diannaa (talk) 10:58, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * @Diannaa You are directing me to a page which says "59% of edit (118 words)" without any further explanation, diff or history whatsoever.
 * All it says is this: The revision ID couldn't be found: 1147110408.
 * Does that mean that you have completely deleted the page revision with my addition and, therefore, nobody can verify or disprove my/your allegations anymore?
 * Anyhow, as I said before: there is no point in this. First Mr Ollie came up with rules of his/her own, which I pointed out that they don't apply, then you came to rescue with a copyright claim (58% of 118 words ?). And all this for a mere addition of an open-source SNA application in a WP page which lists SNA applications. I rest my case. 2A02:587:4514:7D01:2320:B698:D151:B429 (talk) 11:16, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Go to the CopyPatrol report and click on the link marked "iThenticate Report" (not on the diff, which has been revision-deleted) to get an idea of the overlap, and why the text had to be removed. The revision has been hidden from view but not completely deleted. This was done under our Revision deletion policy so that the copyright material is no longer accessible except to admins. — Diannaa (talk) 11:24, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
 * As I said: there is no point in continuing this ping-pong. Have it your way and good day. 2A02:587:4514:7D01:2320:B698:D151:B429 (talk) 11:26, 30 March 2023 (UTC)